Bill Is A Fucking Jackass

I’ve been trying to find the original author of this piece and I’ve been unsuccessful so far. It’s Here’s a hilarious allegory to the current ACA aka Obamacare hoopla.

So, Imagine that the company you work for held a poll, and asked everyone if they thought it would be a good idea to put a soda machine in the break room. The poll came back, and the majority of your colleagues said “Yes”, indicating that they would like a soda machine. Some said no, but the majority said yes. So, a week later, there’s a soda machine.

Now imagine that Bill in accounting voted against the soda machine. He has a strong hatred for caffeinated soft drinks, thinks they are bad you you, whatever. He campaigns throughout the office to get the machine removed. Well, management decides “OK, we’ll ask again” and again, the majority of people say “Yes, lets keep the soda machine.”

Bill continues to campaign, and management continues to ask the employees, and every time, the answer is in favor of the soda machine. This happens, lets say… 35 times. Eventually, Bill says “OK, I’M NOT PROCESSING PAYROLL ANYMORE UNTIL THE SODA MACHINE IS REMOVED”, so nobody will get paid unless management removes the machine.

What should we do???

Answer: Fire Bill and get someone who will do the fucking job.

Bonus: Bill tells everyone that he was willing to “Negotiate”, to come to a solution where everyone got their payroll checks, but only so long as that negotiation capitulated to his demand to remove the soda machine.

Ok, let’s expand on this example just a little more to make it more “real life,” shall we?

First off, Bill’s office has a group people that were elected by the workers to make decisions for bettering employee’s morale and overall happiness at work. One day, that group decides the office needs a soda machine. There was no vote in the office, just a vote in the morale group, and they bring in the machine. Upon doing this, they also decide that if there’s a soda machine that EVERYBODY in the office needs to have a soda. Everyday. Whether they need it or not. Everyone must have a soda. On top of that, they wont tell the employees what kinds of soda are in the machine until it arrives, or how much it will cost. The group decides, and the soda machine arrives.

Now Bill is just an employee. He drinks soda occasionally, and likes a certain brand because he knows it’s good, but he doesn’t drink it everyday because that’s expensive. When Bill finds out that soda is now mandatory at work he gets outraged and petitions to remove the soda machine, because Bill doesn’t have the budget to buy a soda everyday. The morale group campaigns that everyone needs soda, and manages to even convince people that don’t drink soda that they need to. Now more people that don’t drink soda are becoming aware of the rule and try to opt out. “You can bring in your own soda,” they are told, “to keep from buying a soda from the soda machine every day. If you don’t bring a soda, and don’t buy your own soda from our machine, you’ll still be docked the cost of a soda per day from your pay. It’s only fair to everyone.” When the machine arrives, they finally disclose that the sodas cost employees $2.50 each, but you can’t see what soda you get when you push a button. It’s just random luck that you’ll get what you want. On top of that, they secretly neglect to tell people that the best price they could get on soda was $4 a can, but they sell them at $2.50 because they believe everyone can afford that, regardless of if they can.

Bill is in accounting and knows math, and he will not stand for people having money deducted from their paychecks that are not actually drinking or bringing soda. He also recognizes that the company’s money is being spent frivolously and the cost is far more than the return. It will eventually bankrupt the company. After numerous petitions to have the machine removed, he finally stops processing payroll, and will not resume until the machine is removed. The morale group will not budge, and refuses to remove the machine, or change any rules surrounding it. The company is at a standstill, and must close down until the issue is resolved.

Ok, let’s expand on this example just a little more to make it more “real life,” shall we?

First off, Bill’s office has a group people that were elected by the workers to make decisions for bettering employee’s morale and overall happiness at work. One day, that group decides the office needs a soda machine. There was no vote in the office, just a vote in the morale group, and they bring in the machine. Upon doing this, they also decide that if there’s a soda machine that EVERYBODY in the office needs to have a soda. Everyday. Whether they need it or not. Everyone must have a soda. On top of that, they wont tell the employees what kinds of soda are in the machine until it arrives, or how much it will cost. The group decides, and the soda machine arrives.

Now Bill is just an employee. He drinks soda occasionally, and likes a certain brand because he knows it’s good, but he doesn’t drink it everyday because that’s expensive. When Bill finds out that soda is now mandatory at work he gets outraged and petitions to remove the soda machine, because Bill doesn’t have the budget to buy a soda everyday. The morale group campaigns that everyone needs soda, and manages to even convince people that don’t drink soda that they need to. Now more people that don’t drink soda are becoming aware of the rule and try to opt out. “You can bring in your own soda,” they are told, “to keep from buying a soda from the soda machine every day. If you don’t bring a soda, and don’t buy your own soda from our machine, you’ll still be docked the cost of a soda per day from your pay. It’s only fair to everyone.” When the machine arrives, they finally disclose that the sodas cost employees $2.50 each, but you can’t see what soda you get when you push a button. It’s just random luck that you’ll get what you want. On top of that, they secretly neglect to tell people that the best price they could get on soda was $4 a can, but they sell them at $2.50 because they believe everyone can afford that, regardless of if they can.

Bill is in accounting and knows math, and he will not stand for people having money deducted from their paychecks that are not actually drinking or bringing soda. He also recognizes that the company’s money is being spent frivolously and the cost is far more than the return. It will eventually bankrupt the company. After numerous petitions to have the machine removed, he finally stops processing payroll, and will not resume until the machine is removed. The morale group will not budge, and refuses to remove the machine, or change any rules surrounding it. The company is at a standstill, and must close down until the issue is resolved.

Someone on here needs to get a clue. The ACA was passed and is law. However, the actual law that was passed and the one that we are forced to comply with are different. YOUR president has made significant changes to the ACA law AFTER it was passed. Does anyone do any research anymore before they spew their crap from behind their keyboards? By making changes AFTER it was passed is against everything that he said he stood for when campaigning. Bottom line…YOUR president has the power to pass or veto any bill at any time, whether it’s passed by congress or not. He has final say, PERIOD. He’s basically a mediator. In this case, YOUR president came up with an asinine bill, and since it’s his bill, he will make sure we have it forced down our throats no matter the consequences. He doesn’t have to personally pay any consequences, so he has no worries. It’s blatantly clear that YOUR president hates Americans. People, please do your research and know what you are talking about before posting. Maybe, just maybe, instead of holding your collective hands out and waiting for them to be filled by those of us who actually earn our keep, you can make an effort on your own part to make a life for yourselves, so we don’t have to support you.

Someone on here needs to get a clue. The ACA was passed and is law. However, the actual law that was passed and the one that we are forced to comply with are different. YOUR president has made significant changes to the ACA law AFTER it was passed. Does anyone do any research anymore before they spew their crap from behind their keyboards? By making changes AFTER it was passed is against everything that he said he stood for when campaigning. Bottom line…YOUR president has the power to pass or veto any bill at any time, whether it’s passed by congress or not. He has final say, PERIOD. He’s basically a mediator. In this case, YOUR president came up with an asinine bill, and since it’s his bill, he will make sure we have it forced down our throats no matter the consequences. He doesn’t have to personally pay any consequences, so he has no worries. It’s blatantly clear that YOUR president hates Americans. People, please do your research and know what you are talking about before posting. Maybe, just maybe, instead of holding your collective hands out and waiting for them to be filled by those of us who actually earn our keep, you can make an effort on your own part to make a life for yourselves, so we don’t have to support you.

All I know is after logging on to the exchanges my wife and I can get a decent healthcare plan we can afford on our budget. That’s all I need to know. Call it whatever you like and rail against it all you want, but this reform is helping my family out. If we can blow billions in subsidies and sweetheart deals for companies that post record profits year after year then the average person can get a little help getting healthcare.

All I know is after logging on to the exchanges my wife and I can get a decent healthcare plan we can afford on our budget. That’s all I need to know. Call it whatever you like and rail against it all you want, but this reform is helping my family out. If we can blow billions in subsidies and sweetheart deals for companies that post record profits year after year then the average person can get a little help getting healthcare.

Consider this: The boss convinced his employees to vote for the soda machine by promising them Coke and Pepsi for affordable prices. But then once he had support for his soda machine, he planned to fill it with nothing but Diet Fresca, and charge insane prices for it. Bill was hired after the employees realized they’d been duped. He was hired because he promised to get the boss to honor his original commitment. When the boss refused to compromise, Bill suggested withholding the funding for the soda machine. The boss countered by withholding everyones pay, and stocking the soda machine with overpriced Diet Fresca anyway. The aftermath being that nobody’s getting paid and the employees are stuck with crappy drinks in their soda machine; Bill looks like a jerk for trying to keep his word, and nobody dares to challenge the boss for his deception.

Consider this: The boss convinced his employees to vote for the soda machine by promising them Coke and Pepsi for affordable prices. But then once he had support for his soda machine, he planned to fill it with nothing but Diet Fresca, and charge insane prices for it. Bill was hired after the employees realized they’d been duped. He was hired because he promised to get the boss to honor his original commitment. When the boss refused to compromise, Bill suggested withholding the funding for the soda machine. The boss countered by withholding everyones pay, and stocking the soda machine with overpriced Diet Fresca anyway. The aftermath being that nobody’s getting paid and the employees are stuck with crappy drinks in their soda machine; Bill looks like a jerk for trying to keep his word, and nobody dares to challenge the boss for his deception.

Consider this: The boss convinced his employees to vote for the soda machine by promising them Coke and Pepsi for affordable prices. But then once he had support for his soda machine, he planned to fill it with nothing but Diet Fresca, and charge insane prices for it. Bill was hired after the employees realized they’d been duped. He was hired because he promised to get the boss to honor his original commitment. When the boss refused to compromise, Bill suggested withholding the funding for the soda machine. The boss countered by withholding everyones pay, and stocking the soda machine with overpriced Diet Fresca anyway. The aftermath being that nobody’s getting paid and the employees are stuck with crappy drinks in their soda machine; Bill looks like a jerk for trying to keep his word, and nobody dares to challenge the boss for his deception.

Diabetics in the office who cannot afford a soda also can not afford healthcare. Their blood sugar drops they need a soda, oops no soda machine they die. Well its their fault because a soda was $2.50, health care is $900 a month for 1 person. If they would have moved to most any other developed country they could have bought healthcare there, and would be alive today.We won’t stand for that in America, we do not care that our annual incomes for 95% of us is dropping,we do not even buy American products because Wal Mart does not sell them, we saved a nickel, that is what is important right! I believe in trickle down policies, 5% of Americans have almost all of the wealth of our nation. You wait and see, the jobs are coming, and the rich they will give us what we need, after all we have values and who would let it’s fellow Americans die because they do not have healthcare or Soda Machines.

Diabetics in the office who cannot afford a soda also can not afford healthcare. Their blood sugar drops they need a soda, oops no soda machine they die. Well its their fault because a soda was $2.50, health care is $900 a month for 1 person. If they would have moved to most any other developed country they could have bought healthcare there, and would be alive today.We won’t stand for that in America, we do not care that our annual incomes for 95% of us is dropping,we do not even buy American products because Wal Mart does not sell them, we saved a nickel, that is what is important right! I believe in trickle down policies, 5% of Americans have almost all of the wealth of our nation. You wait and see, the jobs are coming, and the rich they will give us what we need, after all we have values and who would let it’s fellow Americans die because they do not have healthcare or Soda Machines.

Diabetics in the office who cannot afford a soda also can not afford healthcare. Their blood sugar drops they need a soda, oops no soda machine they die. Well its their fault because a soda was $2.50, health care is $900 a month for 1 person. If they would have moved to most any other developed country they could have bought healthcare there, and would be alive today.We won’t stand for that in America, we do not care that our annual incomes for 95% of us is dropping,we do not even buy American products because Wal Mart does not sell them, we saved a nickel, that is what is important right! I believe in trickle down policies, 5% of Americans have almost all of the wealth of our nation. You wait and see, the jobs are coming, and the rich they will give us what we need, after all we have values and who would let it’s fellow Americans die because they do not have healthcare or Soda Machines.

So let’s take your basic story, and make it more analogous to the federal government and the ACA. So let’s say there are three groups the employees vote for: the CEO, the Board, and your Morale Group. The CEO is the President, the Board is the Senate, the Morale Group is the Congress. To change any rule for the government, the Board and Morale Group must vote in the majority for it and the CEO must sign it. And let’s say there are two parties the Pops, who want the soda machine, and the Waters, who don’t. The CEO is a Pops, and ran in 2008 on a pro-soda machine platform. In 2008 major majorities of other Pops who also were pro-soda machine won on both the Boat and the Morale Group. In 2009 they pass your version of the Soda bill. A soda machine is installed, everyone must buy a soda every day, if not they are fined. But the soda machine isn’t going to be installed until 2014, and everyone is made aware of this requirement 4.5 years in advance.

The Waters hate the soda machine rule, so they run in the 2010 mid-term election on repealing it. They win a majority in the Morale group, and while they gain significant ground in the Board, they do not gain a majority. They run on the same premise again (repealing the soda machine rule) in 2012, when the CEO is up for election as well. They lose ground in the Morale Group (but retain a majority), lose ground on the Board, and the Sodas maintain the CEO. In other words, the entire company voted, by majority, to re-elect the people who view one of their primary accomplishments as the soda machine rule. It’s well known that without a clean sweep of the three houses, or at least huge and extremely rare majorities on the Board and Morale Group, you can’t pass or repeal rules.

Bill is the majority leader in the Morale Group, aka the Speaker of the Morale Group. Bill is actually kind of center Water than a flat out Pop hater, but the group of employees who get to vote for his spot on the Morale Group are pretty hardcore Water, and he knows he faces a risk of someone from the Only Spring Water All the Time section of his party in the next election if he doesn’t seem to be a pure enough Water.

Now, to change the way money is spent in the company, a new budget must be passed. And man, is this process a pain in the butt. So what the CEO, Board and Morale Group USUALLY do is just pass a continuing resolution to keep the budget the same way it was before.

But Bill is getting pressure from the Only Spring Water All the Time faction. Sure there’s a bi-drink majority in the Morale Group that would pass the CR, but his spot in the Morale Group itself could be on the line in a year. And even if he does keep his spot in the Morale Group, unless the Waters make major gains in 2014, which most view as fairly unlikely (although they admit this is hard to predict this far out), odds are he at least loses his role as Speaker. So he refuses to bring the CR up for a vote unless the CEO and Board agree to significantly alter the soda machine rule. And unless there is a CR, significant portions of the company will shut down, and those employees won’t get paid. Not Bill, he’ll get paid. But other employees won’t.

So even ignoring all the specific aspects the soda machine rule and the ACA don’t have in common (no one goes bankrupt because of soda bills, as far as I am aware), the problems are twofold: first, that there have been two elections where the primary issue have been the soda rule. The employees by majority voted to keep it. Second, it’s the use of a process that is not designed to have repeals or passing of unrelated legislation attached.

In other words, if the Republicans want to have the ACA repealed, all you need to do is the exact same thing Democrats had to do to get it passed: Win the Presidency, get 60 votes in the Senate, and win the House.

Honestly, WHAT the legislation is that some Republicans are attempting to repeal or revise through this process is wholly inapposite. The big issue is that it’s an improper process for attempting to do so.

So let’s take your basic story, and make it more analogous to the federal government and the ACA. So let’s say there are three groups the employees vote for: the CEO, the Board, and your Morale Group. The CEO is the President, the Board is the Senate, the Morale Group is the Congress. To change any rule for the government, the Board and Morale Group must vote in the majority for it and the CEO must sign it. And let’s say there are two parties the Pops, who want the soda machine, and the Waters, who don’t. The CEO is a Pops, and ran in 2008 on a pro-soda machine platform. In 2008 major majorities of other Pops who also were pro-soda machine won on both the Boat and the Morale Group. In 2009 they pass your version of the Soda bill. A soda machine is installed, everyone must buy a soda every day, if not they are fined. But the soda machine isn’t going to be installed until 2014, and everyone is made aware of this requirement 4.5 years in advance.

The Waters hate the soda machine rule, so they run in the 2010 mid-term election on repealing it. They win a majority in the Morale group, and while they gain significant ground in the Board, they do not gain a majority. They run on the same premise again (repealing the soda machine rule) in 2012, when the CEO is up for election as well. They lose ground in the Morale Group (but retain a majority), lose ground on the Board, and the Sodas maintain the CEO. In other words, the entire company voted, by majority, to re-elect the people who view one of their primary accomplishments as the soda machine rule. It’s well known that without a clean sweep of the three houses, or at least huge and extremely rare majorities on the Board and Morale Group, you can’t pass or repeal rules.

Bill is the majority leader in the Morale Group, aka the Speaker of the Morale Group. Bill is actually kind of center Water than a flat out Pop hater, but the group of employees who get to vote for his spot on the Morale Group are pretty hardcore Water, and he knows he faces a risk of someone from the Only Spring Water All the Time section of his party in the next election if he doesn’t seem to be a pure enough Water.

Now, to change the way money is spent in the company, a new budget must be passed. And man, is this process a pain in the butt. So what the CEO, Board and Morale Group USUALLY do is just pass a continuing resolution to keep the budget the same way it was before.

But Bill is getting pressure from the Only Spring Water All the Time faction. Sure there’s a bi-drink majority in the Morale Group that would pass the CR, but his spot in the Morale Group itself could be on the line in a year. And even if he does keep his spot in the Morale Group, unless the Waters make major gains in 2014, which most view as fairly unlikely (although they admit this is hard to predict this far out), odds are he at least loses his role as Speaker. So he refuses to bring the CR up for a vote unless the CEO and Board agree to significantly alter the soda machine rule. And unless there is a CR, significant portions of the company will shut down, and those employees won’t get paid. Not Bill, he’ll get paid. But other employees won’t.

So even ignoring all the specific aspects the soda machine rule and the ACA don’t have in common (no one goes bankrupt because of soda bills, as far as I am aware), the problems are twofold: first, that there have been two elections where the primary issue have been the soda rule. The employees by majority voted to keep it. Second, it’s the use of a process that is not designed to have repeals or passing of unrelated legislation attached.

In other words, if the Republicans want to have the ACA repealed, all you need to do is the exact same thing Democrats had to do to get it passed: Win the Presidency, get 60 votes in the Senate, and win the House.

Honestly, WHAT the legislation is that some Republicans are attempting to repeal or revise through this process is wholly inapposite. The big issue is that it’s an improper process for attempting to do so.

So then they bring in a soda machine, but instead of soda, they fill it with BO berry juice, and charge $10 per 12 oz. can. Then they say that everyone is required to buy that BO berry juice, and they are not allowed to bring their own beverages. But the upper management doesn’t need to buy it, and the new hires can have it for 10 cents each. Now the employees don’t want the fucking soda machine because there’s no damn soda in it, an BO berry juice tastes like shit. So now the fucking company shuts down.

So then they bring in a soda machine, but instead of soda, they fill it with BO berry juice, and charge $10 per 12 oz. can. Then they say that everyone is required to buy that BO berry juice, and they are not allowed to bring their own beverages. But the upper management doesn’t need to buy it, and the new hires can have it for 10 cents each. Now the employees don’t want the fucking soda machine because there’s no damn soda in it, an BO berry juice tastes like shit. So now the fucking company shuts down.

So then they bring in a soda machine, but instead of soda, they fill it with BO berry juice, and charge $10 per 12 oz. can. Then they say that everyone is required to buy that BO berry juice, and they are not allowed to bring their own beverages. But the upper management doesn’t need to buy it, and the new hires can have it for 10 cents each. Now the employees don’t want the fucking soda machine because there’s no damn soda in it, an BO berry juice tastes like shit. So now the fucking company shuts down.

President Obama to NPR’s Steve Inskeep: “I shouldn’t have to offer [the Republicans] anything. They’re not doing me a favor by paying for things that they have already approved for the government to do. That’s part of their basic function of government; that’s not doing me a favor. That’s doing what the American people sent them here to do, carrying out their responsibilities.”

ExAcTly. The President *did* his part. He endeavored to reform healthcare in the country and he did it. It passed. It’s the law. The law was upheld by an institution called ‘The Supreme Court’. It was put to another test called an ‘election’. The president won that too.

Did the Tea Party (Tea-Hadists) respect that and move on?

No, no they didn’t.

They spent their time trying to reverse the law of the land. They felt it was so important to do that (rather than pass a budget or work on the economy) so they did it forty-four (44) times.

John Boehner: Serious attempts to defund the ACA: 44 Serious attempts to pass a budget: 0

Now—their grand plan is to use extortion? To hurt everyday Americans while they stand on what? Principle? I don’t think so. That’s pathetic.

The tea party has hijacked the GOP and literally said they will hinder/hijack the primary process next election cycle unless they get their way. They literally operate full time on extortion like measures.

How is this Democracy? How is this fair?

The teams had left the field, the battle was over. It was like that scene in “Million Dollar Baby” where after she wins the fight the other fighter hits her (after the bell) and that’s what paralyzes her…yeah, it’s like that.

The GOP has lost any and all credibility. They have seceded to the extremist, narcissistic radical wing of their party. They’re run now by the useless, immoderate, conceited Ted Cruz? I hope they’re happy.

There are poor women who are cut off from funds to feed their babies. No formula for babies…(?) If the Tea Party and GOP don’t feel utter shame about that then there is simply no hope.

They have now put families out of work, embarrassed our country, closed down institutions nationwide and crippled our economy.

Is the GOP proud of this? Can we sound the death knell of the Tea Party now?

President Obama to NPR’s Steve Inskeep: “I shouldn’t have to offer [the Republicans] anything. They’re not doing me a favor by paying for things that they have already approved for the government to do. That’s part of their basic function of government; that’s not doing me a favor. That’s doing what the American people sent them here to do, carrying out their responsibilities.”

ExAcTly. The President *did* his part. He endeavored to reform healthcare in the country and he did it. It passed. It’s the law. The law was upheld by an institution called ‘The Supreme Court’. It was put to another test called an ‘election’. The president won that too.

Did the Tea Party (Tea-Hadists) respect that and move on?

No, no they didn’t.

They spent their time trying to reverse the law of the land. They felt it was so important to do that (rather than pass a budget or work on the economy) so they did it forty-four (44) times.

John Boehner: Serious attempts to defund the ACA: 44 Serious attempts to pass a budget: 0

Now—their grand plan is to use extortion? To hurt everyday Americans while they stand on what? Principle? I don’t think so. That’s pathetic.

The tea party has hijacked the GOP and literally said they will hinder/hijack the primary process next election cycle unless they get their way. They literally operate full time on extortion like measures.

How is this Democracy? How is this fair?

The teams had left the field, the battle was over. It was like that scene in “Million Dollar Baby” where after she wins the fight the other fighter hits her (after the bell) and that’s what paralyzes her…yeah, it’s like that.

The GOP has lost any and all credibility. They have seceded to the extremist, narcissistic radical wing of their party. They’re run now by the useless, immoderate, conceited Ted Cruz? I hope they’re happy.

There are poor women who are cut off from funds to feed their babies. No formula for babies…(?) If the Tea Party and GOP don’t feel utter shame about that then there is simply no hope.

They have now put families out of work, embarrassed our country, closed down institutions nationwide and crippled our economy.

Is the GOP proud of this? Can we sound the death knell of the Tea Party now?

President Obama to NPR’s Steve Inskeep: “I shouldn’t have to offer [the Republicans] anything. They’re not doing me a favor by paying for things that they have already approved for the government to do. That’s part of their basic function of government; that’s not doing me a favor. That’s doing what the American people sent them here to do, carrying out their responsibilities.”

ExAcTly. The President *did* his part. He endeavored to reform healthcare in the country and he did it. It passed. It’s the law. The law was upheld by an institution called ‘The Supreme Court’. It was put to another test called an ‘election’. The president won that too.

Did the Tea Party (Tea-Hadists) respect that and move on?

No, no they didn’t.

They spent their time trying to reverse the law of the land. They felt it was so important to do that (rather than pass a budget or work on the economy) so they did it forty-four (44) times.

John Boehner: Serious attempts to defund the ACA: 44 Serious attempts to pass a budget: 0

Now—their grand plan is to use extortion? To hurt everyday Americans while they stand on what? Principle? I don’t think so. That’s pathetic.

The tea party has hijacked the GOP and literally said they will hinder/hijack the primary process next election cycle unless they get their way. They literally operate full time on extortion like measures.

How is this Democracy? How is this fair?

The teams had left the field, the battle was over. It was like that scene in “Million Dollar Baby” where after she wins the fight the other fighter hits her (after the bell) and that’s what paralyzes her…yeah, it’s like that.

The GOP has lost any and all credibility. They have seceded to the extremist, narcissistic radical wing of their party. They’re run now by the useless, immoderate, conceited Ted Cruz? I hope they’re happy.

There are poor women who are cut off from funds to feed their babies. No formula for babies…(?) If the Tea Party and GOP don’t feel utter shame about that then there is simply no hope.

They have now put families out of work, embarrassed our country, closed down institutions nationwide and crippled our economy.

Is the GOP proud of this? Can we sound the death knell of the Tea Party now?

You’re talking about healthcare costs? People who REFUSE to buy healthcare are the freeloaders. Who pays when these people get into car accidents? Or when they go to the ER for simple problems. This is a vast number of people, and they’re the ones who are breaking us. The ACA is law–accepted through the democratic process. There is also a repeal process, which does not include Republican bullying that leads to government shut-down. The people have actually spoken. How can anyone attest that the “majority of Americans don’t want this”. We vote for those who represent our interests, and they have voted accordingly.

You’re talking about healthcare costs? People who REFUSE to buy healthcare are the freeloaders. Who pays when these people get into car accidents? Or when they go to the ER for simple problems. This is a vast number of people, and they’re the ones who are breaking us. The ACA is law–accepted through the democratic process. There is also a repeal process, which does not include Republican bullying that leads to government shut-down. The people have actually spoken. How can anyone attest that the “majority of Americans don’t want this”. We vote for those who represent our interests, and they have voted accordingly.

You’re talking about healthcare costs? People who REFUSE to buy healthcare are the freeloaders. Who pays when these people get into car accidents? Or when they go to the ER for simple problems. This is a vast number of people, and they’re the ones who are breaking us. The ACA is law–accepted through the democratic process. There is also a repeal process, which does not include Republican bullying that leads to government shut-down. The people have actually spoken. How can anyone attest that the “majority of Americans don’t want this”. We vote for those who represent our interests, and they have voted accordingly.

Health care is not an optional product like soda. It is one that eventually everyone will need. If they do not have insurance at the time they need it, it costs us all more in what we pay for health care services. Mostly because of lack of universal coverage health care coverage costs much more than it should. Our health care system is broken and the AHCA is a step in the right direction in fixing it.

Health care is not an optional product like soda. It is one that eventually everyone will need. If they do not have insurance at the time they need it, it costs us all more in what we pay for health care services. Mostly because of lack of universal coverage health care coverage costs much more than it should. Our health care system is broken and the AHCA is a step in the right direction in fixing it.

Health care is not an optional product like soda. It is one that eventually everyone will need. If they do not have insurance at the time they need it, it costs us all more in what we pay for health care services. Mostly because of lack of universal coverage health care coverage costs much more than it should. Our health care system is broken and the AHCA is a step in the right direction in fixing it.

OK…. As a Canadian I just don’t get the issue. What is so wrong about making health care affordable for those that can’t afford it? I just don’t understand the mentality. I know that there was a lot of opposition to this concept here in Canada when we adopted free health care to all in the 1960s. Why do people consider this concept “communist” yet getting the government involved in bailing out banks, etc., o.k.? Please someone explain this to me. Seriously, I am not trying to be a smart ass, I just don’t understand.

OK…. As a Canadian I just don’t get the issue. What is so wrong about making health care affordable for those that can’t afford it? I just don’t understand the mentality. I know that there was a lot of opposition to this concept here in Canada when we adopted free health care to all in the 1960s. Why do people consider this concept “communist” yet getting the government involved in bailing out banks, etc., o.k.? Please someone explain this to me. Seriously, I am not trying to be a smart ass, I just don’t understand.

OK…. As a Canadian I just don’t get the issue. What is so wrong about making health care affordable for those that can’t afford it? I just don’t understand the mentality. I know that there was a lot of opposition to this concept here in Canada when we adopted free health care to all in the 1960s. Why do people consider this concept “communist” yet getting the government involved in bailing out banks, etc., o.k.? Please someone explain this to me. Seriously, I am not trying to be a smart ass, I just don’t understand.

I’m from Massachusetts. So we’ve had mandated healthcare for a few years now and I can honestly say it hasn’t really made much of a difference for me financially. For those of us who cannot afford it, Massachusetts offers MassHealth, which is essentially free healthcare. Maybe other states should follow suit. Because then what you have is reasonably priced health insurance for people who can afford it, and free health insurance for people who can’t. Doesn’t sound so awful to me. And as for not being able to choose a doctor… That’s really just an outright lie. I’ve changed my children’s Pediatrician 4 times until I found someone I liked (and that includes the care centers they worked at, not just the doctors) and my own PCP twice. I had NO problems finding someone I trusted to assist my family with our health. The plans offered in Masachusetts’ Health Connector (which is what the Affordable Care Act is based on) are very widely accepted in our area and I have yet to experience a situation where my particular insurance was not accepted.

I will say that having had two kids and been in a major not at fault car accident, I was sure glad I NEEDED health insurance because I would have completely DROWNED in debt from medical bills if I hadn’t. Did you know it’s almost like $15,000 to have a baby? And my car accident? I was pregnant, so they had me on every machine imaginable making sure that baby would be ok. My portion- $500. Without insurance? Closer to $13,000. I’m not so upset that I had the safety net when I needed it. Shit happens, that’s all there is to it. And if there is a way to help more people deal with that shit when it comes, then great. I’m telling you- it’s not the nightmare everyone is making it out to be.

Also- let’s just agree that while Christopher Brouelette’s story definitely pokes some holes in very simplistic explanation of the government shutdown offered by our blogger, soda was an awful example in the first place and that makes it seem easy to refute. Who the hell would mandate soda? That makes anyone who is in favor seem like an idiot, so I think we can all agree that his version doesn’t accurately represent the situation either. Let’s replace soda with something that ISN’T actually bad for your health, but beneficial (I get it- this is arguable, but it IS fair to say that those who want to mandate healthcare DO feel that its beneficial, and that’s an important fact to consider here). I’m not even going to think of anything imaginary to replace it with because we all know what this is about and it’s sort of silly to dumb it down. Now Bill looks like a child stomping his feet because his feelings about making whatever the hell it is that the office is worried about mandatory didn’t win out over the majority vote. We can use a million different examples. Some will be good and some will be as bad as the soda one, but at the end of the day it actually IS as simple as just needing to accept defeat.

I’m from Massachusetts. So we’ve had mandated healthcare for a few years now and I can honestly say it hasn’t really made much of a difference for me financially. For those of us who cannot afford it, Massachusetts offers MassHealth, which is essentially free healthcare. Maybe other states should follow suit. Because then what you have is reasonably priced health insurance for people who can afford it, and free health insurance for people who can’t. Doesn’t sound so awful to me. And as for not being able to choose a doctor… That’s really just an outright lie. I’ve changed my children’s Pediatrician 4 times until I found someone I liked (and that includes the care centers they worked at, not just the doctors) and my own PCP twice. I had NO problems finding someone I trusted to assist my family with our health. The plans offered in Masachusetts’ Health Connector (which is what the Affordable Care Act is based on) are very widely accepted in our area and I have yet to experience a situation where my particular insurance was not accepted.

I will say that having had two kids and been in a major not at fault car accident, I was sure glad I NEEDED health insurance because I would have completely DROWNED in debt from medical bills if I hadn’t. Did you know it’s almost like $15,000 to have a baby? And my car accident? I was pregnant, so they had me on every machine imaginable making sure that baby would be ok. My portion- $500. Without insurance? Closer to $13,000. I’m not so upset that I had the safety net when I needed it. Shit happens, that’s all there is to it. And if there is a way to help more people deal with that shit when it comes, then great. I’m telling you- it’s not the nightmare everyone is making it out to be.

Also- let’s just agree that while Christopher Brouelette’s story definitely pokes some holes in very simplistic explanation of the government shutdown offered by our blogger, soda was an awful example in the first place and that makes it seem easy to refute. Who the hell would mandate soda? That makes anyone who is in favor seem like an idiot, so I think we can all agree that his version doesn’t accurately represent the situation either. Let’s replace soda with something that ISN’T actually bad for your health, but beneficial (I get it- this is arguable, but it IS fair to say that those who want to mandate healthcare DO feel that its beneficial, and that’s an important fact to consider here). I’m not even going to think of anything imaginary to replace it with because we all know what this is about and it’s sort of silly to dumb it down. Now Bill looks like a child stomping his feet because his feelings about making whatever the hell it is that the office is worried about mandatory didn’t win out over the majority vote. We can use a million different examples. Some will be good and some will be as bad as the soda one, but at the end of the day it actually IS as simple as just needing to accept defeat.

I’m from Massachusetts. So we’ve had mandated healthcare for a few years now and I can honestly say it hasn’t really made much of a difference for me financially. For those of us who cannot afford it, Massachusetts offers MassHealth, which is essentially free healthcare. Maybe other states should follow suit. Because then what you have is reasonably priced health insurance for people who can afford it, and free health insurance for people who can’t. Doesn’t sound so awful to me. And as for not being able to choose a doctor… That’s really just an outright lie. I’ve changed my children’s Pediatrician 4 times until I found someone I liked (and that includes the care centers they worked at, not just the doctors) and my own PCP twice. I had NO problems finding someone I trusted to assist my family with our health. The plans offered in Masachusetts’ Health Connector (which is what the Affordable Care Act is based on) are very widely accepted in our area and I have yet to experience a situation where my particular insurance was not accepted.

I will say that having had two kids and been in a major not at fault car accident, I was sure glad I NEEDED health insurance because I would have completely DROWNED in debt from medical bills if I hadn’t. Did you know it’s almost like $15,000 to have a baby? And my car accident? I was pregnant, so they had me on every machine imaginable making sure that baby would be ok. My portion- $500. Without insurance? Closer to $13,000. I’m not so upset that I had the safety net when I needed it. Shit happens, that’s all there is to it. And if there is a way to help more people deal with that shit when it comes, then great. I’m telling you- it’s not the nightmare everyone is making it out to be.

Also- let’s just agree that while Christopher Brouelette’s story definitely pokes some holes in very simplistic explanation of the government shutdown offered by our blogger, soda was an awful example in the first place and that makes it seem easy to refute. Who the hell would mandate soda? That makes anyone who is in favor seem like an idiot, so I think we can all agree that his version doesn’t accurately represent the situation either. Let’s replace soda with something that ISN’T actually bad for your health, but beneficial (I get it- this is arguable, but it IS fair to say that those who want to mandate healthcare DO feel that its beneficial, and that’s an important fact to consider here). I’m not even going to think of anything imaginary to replace it with because we all know what this is about and it’s sort of silly to dumb it down. Now Bill looks like a child stomping his feet because his feelings about making whatever the hell it is that the office is worried about mandatory didn’t win out over the majority vote. We can use a million different examples. Some will be good and some will be as bad as the soda one, but at the end of the day it actually IS as simple as just needing to accept defeat.

Look can we just skip this whole fiasco and privatise everything and make profit off of it for the good of the world economy. If we privatise everything from Hospitals to Police where if you arn’t covered by a companies plan you don’t recieve medical assistance or protection against crime there would be alot more revenue. The fire departments used to be private. Used to be lot’s of different companies that would supply the service. Lots of jobs. If you didn’t pay that particular company they would drive right by your burning home. Then the hippy communist’s had they way and made it public. Disgusting. Thank God companies have started to copyright plant staples and made it virtually illegal to plant anything else. Nestle has the right idea of privatising all of the worlds water. Personally I look forward to the day I can buy Nike brand air with the faint scent of pine. I just hope all those disease ridden pine tree forests are gotten rid of, we need that space for shit!

Look can we just skip this whole fiasco and privatise everything and make profit off of it for the good of the world economy. If we privatise everything from Hospitals to Police where if you arn’t covered by a companies plan you don’t recieve medical assistance or protection against crime there would be alot more revenue. The fire departments used to be private. Used to be lot’s of different companies that would supply the service. Lots of jobs. If you didn’t pay that particular company they would drive right by your burning home. Then the hippy communist’s had they way and made it public. Disgusting. Thank God companies have started to copyright plant staples and made it virtually illegal to plant anything else. Nestle has the right idea of privatising all of the worlds water. Personally I look forward to the day I can buy Nike brand air with the faint scent of pine. I just hope all those disease ridden pine tree forests are gotten rid of, we need that space for shit!

Obvioously, Mary, you do not understand how laws work. Once a law is law, you cannot just change it. It has to go back through the Congress and the Senate to make changes to it. Obama did not have the authority to just change the law any way he wished. Maybe you need to learn a little bit about how government works before you make comments. Unfortunately, Obama and the Democrats are the one having the hissy fit. The Republicans stayed in Washington and the Democrats took their toys and went home so they would not have to negotiate. And Obama himself says he will not negotiate. So who is being childish? Looks like it is Obama. And lets talk about who is doing a lot of damage. It certainly isn’t the Republicans that are spending three times more money to close Monuments and National Parks than it would just to keep them open. But then Obama could not punish us for not wanting his unaffordable insurance that was shoved down out throats by the Democratic Party. And what about all the people that are out of work and the businesses that are losing money becasue of it. And by the way, it IS the job of the Congress to challenge laws that are impractical and unworkable, of which Obamacare is both. Please pick up a book about how the governemnt works and read it because obviously you did not pay attentioin in school.

Look can we just skip this whole fiasco and privatise everything and make profit off of it for the good of the world economy. If we privatise everything from Hospitals to Police where if you arn’t covered by a companies plan you don’t recieve medical assistance or protection against crime there would be alot more revenue. The fire departments used to be private. Used to be lot’s of different companies that would supply the service. Lots of jobs. If you didn’t pay that particular company they would drive right by your burning home. Then the hippy communist’s had they way and made it public. Disgusting. Thank God companies have started to copyright plant staples and made it virtually illegal to plant anything else. Nestle has the right idea of privatising all of the worlds water. Personally I look forward to the day I can buy Nike brand air with the faint scent of pine. I just hope all those disease ridden pine tree forests are gotten rid of, we need that space for shit!

Then Bill says, “Oh, BTW, I’ve decided to pay everyone, but I’m going to go ahead and make sure no one drinks any of that devil soda by locking the doors to the building and making sure no one comes to work. They’ll still get paid, but they won’t have to work.”

Then Bill says, “Oh, BTW, I’ve decided to pay everyone, but I’m going to go ahead and make sure no one drinks any of that devil soda by locking the doors to the building and making sure no one comes to work. They’ll still get paid, but they won’t have to work.”

Then Bill says, “Oh, BTW, I’ve decided to pay everyone, but I’m going to go ahead and make sure no one drinks any of that devil soda by locking the doors to the building and making sure no one comes to work. They’ll still get paid, but they won’t have to work.”

After trying since day one… My fiance signed up this weekend. Platinum plan WITH dental, $361 per month. $10 co-pay and ZERO deductible. VERY HAPPY! He is 55 with pre existing and self-employed. This helps us! <3

After trying since day one… My fiance signed up this weekend. Platinum plan WITH dental, $361 per month. $10 co-pay and ZERO deductible. VERY HAPPY! He is 55 with pre existing and self-employed. This helps us! <3

After trying since day one… My fiance signed up this weekend. Platinum plan WITH dental, $361 per month. $10 co-pay and ZERO deductible. VERY HAPPY! He is 55 with pre existing and self-employed. This helps us! <3

well lets talk a little bit about how our office is going to supply the ‘soda machine’. first lets take a collection to pay for the machine….so when the hat comes back and the collection is counted-its not enough to pay for the machine…so there is another vote only this time the vote is that everyone in the office must pitch in according to their salary to purchase the machine. now we know how bill will vote.. however, those that pitched in the on the first collection asked what was going to happen to the money already in the pot? but the majority said, dont worry about that right now, lets take the vote first to see if we can get an agreement. So it was agreed that EVERYONE would pitch in to purchase the machine, some will pay more and those that had pitched in on the first collection didn’t get the first collection back because the cost of the machine was more than expected, they figured oh well…its for the good of the office. A week goes by and the soda is empty, we need to fill the machine…only some people failed to get soda from the first lot of sodas….reluctantly everyone was asked to take another vote to have everyone pitch in to re-stock the soda according to salary and the majority voted it to be done. During the same time, some of the caring people in the office found out that the mail room only had a coffee machine, the mail room people already used all of their extra money to re-stock the coffee each time.. so a vote was taken in the office to put a soda machine in the mail room, the majority felt bad that they had a soda machine and the mail room didn’t so the majority voted that everyone would pitch in according to salary to purchase a soda machine for the mail room. We all know how Bill voted but a few others kind of felt taken advantage of. Another week goes by and both soda machines needed refilling, in accordance with the previous vote, everyone was required to pitch in though again some did not share in the soda, reluctantly for the good of the office everyone stayed friends and pitched in. This goes on for a month…then the price of soda goes up. Now only 1/2 the people in the office can afford to pitch any money in to re-stock, however the majority held everyone to the agreement and the boss said that if you don’t like it ‘quit’. Another month goes by and the coffee machine in the mail room breaks. So the mail room employees decide not to purchase a new one, no sense in that we have a soda machine.

Unlike soda, everyone DOES use health care eventually. Suppose the healthy young guy who says he can’t afford health insurance and doesn’t need it is hit by a car while riding his bike. He is taken to the hospital, which is obligated to fix him up. The hospital bill is $100,000, but he never completely recovers. He is unable to work and he has medical expenses the rest of his life. Who is going to pay the hospital, and who will pay for his Medicare? The taxpayers and the insured. You and me. People who realize that EVERYONE will eventually use the health care system, so they buy health insurance, even though it’s expensive, even though we’d rather spend our money on other things.

One of the reasons health insurance is so expensive is there are so many people who don’t take responsibility for their own health care. They assume that the government will pay their bills in what they think is the unlikely event that they will need health care.

We have people who would like to buy health insurance, but can’t because of a pre-existing condition. The Affordable Care Act makes insurance available to people with pre-existing conditions. That’s why the Affordable Care Act won’t bring down insurance costs if people wait until they are sick to apply for insurance. People who want to use that tactic are taking advantage of those of us who are paying for insurance, even though we don’t need it today.

Republicans say that Democrats are defined by their support for government handouts to irresponsible people. That’s why it’s so difficult to understand why Republicans are opposed to the Affordable Care Act, which requires that everyone take responsibility for their own health care to the extent they are able. There are subsidies available for low-income people and for businesses with fewer than 50 employees. If businesses with more than 50 employees say they can’t afford a few hundred dollars per month per employee for health insurance, they should prove it, rather than just cry that they will go out of business or lay off employees if they are required to provide health insurance.

The Affordable Care Act only works if everyone — the temporarily-healthy and the already-sick — participates. Attempts to delay the inclusion of everyone are attempts to set the system up for failure.

Unlike soda, everyone DOES use health care eventually. Suppose the healthy young guy who says he can’t afford health insurance and doesn’t need it is hit by a car while riding his bike. He is taken to the hospital, which is obligated to fix him up. The hospital bill is $100,000, but he never completely recovers. He is unable to work and he has medical expenses the rest of his life. Who is going to pay the hospital, and who will pay for his Medicare? The taxpayers and the insured. You and me. People who realize that EVERYONE will eventually use the health care system, so they buy health insurance, even though it’s expensive, even though we’d rather spend our money on other things.

One of the reasons health insurance is so expensive is there are so many people who don’t take responsibility for their own health care. They assume that the government will pay their bills in what they think is the unlikely event that they will need health care.

We have people who would like to buy health insurance, but can’t because of a pre-existing condition. The Affordable Care Act makes insurance available to people with pre-existing conditions. That’s why the Affordable Care Act won’t bring down insurance costs if people wait until they are sick to apply for insurance. People who want to use that tactic are taking advantage of those of us who are paying for insurance, even though we don’t need it today.

Republicans say that Democrats are defined by their support for government handouts to irresponsible people. That’s why it’s so difficult to understand why Republicans are opposed to the Affordable Care Act, which requires that everyone take responsibility for their own health care to the extent they are able. There are subsidies available for low-income people and for businesses with fewer than 50 employees. If businesses with more than 50 employees say they can’t afford a few hundred dollars per month per employee for health insurance, they should prove it, rather than just cry that they will go out of business or lay off employees if they are required to provide health insurance.

The Affordable Care Act only works if everyone — the temporarily-healthy and the already-sick — participates. Attempts to delay the inclusion of everyone are attempts to set the system up for failure.

Unlike soda, everyone DOES use health care eventually. Suppose the healthy young guy who says he can’t afford health insurance and doesn’t need it is hit by a car while riding his bike. He is taken to the hospital, which is obligated to fix him up. The hospital bill is $100,000, but he never completely recovers. He is unable to work and he has medical expenses the rest of his life. Who is going to pay the hospital, and who will pay for his Medicare? The taxpayers and the insured. You and me. People who realize that EVERYONE will eventually use the health care system, so they buy health insurance, even though it’s expensive, even though we’d rather spend our money on other things.

One of the reasons health insurance is so expensive is there are so many people who don’t take responsibility for their own health care. They assume that the government will pay their bills in what they think is the unlikely event that they will need health care.

We have people who would like to buy health insurance, but can’t because of a pre-existing condition. The Affordable Care Act makes insurance available to people with pre-existing conditions. That’s why the Affordable Care Act won’t bring down insurance costs if people wait until they are sick to apply for insurance. People who want to use that tactic are taking advantage of those of us who are paying for insurance, even though we don’t need it today.

Republicans say that Democrats are defined by their support for government handouts to irresponsible people. That’s why it’s so difficult to understand why Republicans are opposed to the Affordable Care Act, which requires that everyone take responsibility for their own health care to the extent they are able. There are subsidies available for low-income people and for businesses with fewer than 50 employees. If businesses with more than 50 employees say they can’t afford a few hundred dollars per month per employee for health insurance, they should prove it, rather than just cry that they will go out of business or lay off employees if they are required to provide health insurance.

The Affordable Care Act only works if everyone — the temporarily-healthy and the already-sick — participates. Attempts to delay the inclusion of everyone are attempts to set the system up for failure.

I have been many problems with my phone and should stop. hope some still makes sence.Competition will also be good for the economics of it. Regarding the comment what if your company can’t afford it . Well any company would have improved profits if they did not supply their employees insurance. Only companies employing more than 50 people will now have to provide that benefit. Post hard-working employees cnnt afford it for their business either their business of keeping up household. already benefited by being allowed to stay on your parent insurance these last three years. As of this year no child Camdike denied insurance for pre- existing condition. Starting 2014 no adult can be denied that either. My biggest gripe is that Republicans and Democrats alike have had two years to digest this and explain it to their constituencies So we could be excited about it instead of now panicking angry and in fact endangering our economy. We must look like fools to the world, This Country that has touted democracy Has done great damage to its integrity. We can’t blame it all on our elected Officials. We have an disengaged, itself Indulgent And apparently ignorant. Can we possibly replace anger with Hope again. I worry not. I hope the errors are not making this look unintelligent the phone is not allowing me to correct. Feel it still worth it if I can help one person get a better picture of what’s going on.

I have been many problems with my phone and should stop. hope some still makes sence.Competition will also be good for the economics of it. Regarding the comment what if your company can’t afford it . Well any company would have improved profits if they did not supply their employees insurance. Only companies employing more than 50 people will now have to provide that benefit. Post hard-working employees cnnt afford it for their business either their business of keeping up household. already benefited by being allowed to stay on your parent insurance these last three years. As of this year no child Camdike denied insurance for pre- existing condition. Starting 2014 no adult can be denied that either. My biggest gripe is that Republicans and Democrats alike have had two years to digest this and explain it to their constituencies So we could be excited about it instead of now panicking angry and in fact endangering our economy. We must look like fools to the world, This Country that has touted democracy Has done great damage to its integrity. We can’t blame it all on our elected Officials. We have an disengaged, itself Indulgent And apparently ignorant. Can we possibly replace anger with Hope again. I worry not. I hope the errors are not making this look unintelligent the phone is not allowing me to correct. Feel it still worth it if I can help one person get a better picture of what’s going on.

I have been many problems with my phone and should stop. hope some still makes sence.Competition will also be good for the economics of it. Regarding the comment what if your company can’t afford it . Well any company would have improved profits if they did not supply their employees insurance. Only companies employing more than 50 people will now have to provide that benefit. Post hard-working employees cnnt afford it for their business either their business of keeping up household. already benefited by being allowed to stay on your parent insurance these last three years. As of this year no child Camdike denied insurance for pre- existing condition. Starting 2014 no adult can be denied that either. My biggest gripe is that Republicans and Democrats alike have had two years to digest this and explain it to their constituencies So we could be excited about it instead of now panicking angry and in fact endangering our economy. We must look like fools to the world, This Country that has touted democracy Has done great damage to its integrity. We can’t blame it all on our elected Officials. We have an disengaged, itself Indulgent And apparently ignorant. Can we possibly replace anger with Hope again. I worry not. I hope the errors are not making this look unintelligent the phone is not allowing me to correct. Feel it still worth it if I can help one person get a better picture of what’s going on.

I think what everyone in this story is missing is that the corporation providing the soda for the soda machine is actually dictating what Bill, “The Employee Morale Group,” and others within the organization are doing. A small group within the organization really likes the soda machine and will pay anything for it, some want the soda for free, some are really angry that soda even exists, but a vast majority of the employees don’t even realize that a soda machine was installed and couldn’t care less about soda. Then you have a group of employees who think they are working on behalf of their fellow office workers and company. In reality, these individuals are too stupid to realize that they have been duped by soda radio hosts, soda television stations, and other strong soda personalities that have been paid for by two brothers (heirs to a substantial soda empire created by their soda father) and their vast network of soda foundations and soda think tanks into supporting higher profits for the corporate executives and shareholders of the soda company (as well as strong support for the 1980 Libertarian Presidential Platform). The company shuts down, all of the workers lose money, and the corporation posts record profits.

I think what everyone in this story is missing is that the corporation providing the soda for the soda machine is actually dictating what Bill, “The Employee Morale Group,” and others within the organization are doing. A small group within the organization really likes the soda machine and will pay anything for it, some want the soda for free, some are really angry that soda even exists, but a vast majority of the employees don’t even realize that a soda machine was installed and couldn’t care less about soda. Then you have a group of employees who think they are working on behalf of their fellow office workers and company. In reality, these individuals are too stupid to realize that they have been duped by soda radio hosts, soda television stations, and other strong soda personalities that have been paid for by two brothers (heirs to a substantial soda empire created by their soda father) and their vast network of soda foundations and soda think tanks into supporting higher profits for the corporate executives and shareholders of the soda company (as well as strong support for the 1980 Libertarian Presidential Platform). The company shuts down, all of the workers lose money, and the corporation posts record profits.

Except, imagine that management said you had to buy $7000 worth of soda from that machine per year or we’ll fine you thousands of dollars. And you can’t bring your own drinks to work anymore with you, because they don’t comply with your company’s soda policy. Oh, and for all the coworkers that can’t afford to buy the soda, you’ll have to take extra money out of your paycheck and buy them the portion of their soda they can’t afford. Oh yeah, and you’ll also have to fund their abortions.

Except, imagine that management said you had to buy $7000 worth of soda from that machine per year or we’ll fine you thousands of dollars. And you can’t bring your own drinks to work anymore with you, because they don’t comply with your company’s soda policy. Oh, and for all the coworkers that can’t afford to buy the soda, you’ll have to take extra money out of your paycheck and buy them the portion of their soda they can’t afford. Oh yeah, and you’ll also have to fund their abortions.

These analogies are quite humorous and really illustrate the powerful differences in the views of this subject, as well as the way many people respond to reality… ‘there is no such thing as diet fresca’ holy crap hilarious… but, if you consider that America is just a giant corporation, I just can’t understand why anyone is surprised and appalled by it. It’s just business. (Let me see your shocked face) As long as there are consumers in a capitalist nation, there will be those who take advantage of it. Maybe greed, power, sociopathic business and personal attitudes are just flat the way it is in this country. We’re slaves to paper and don’t raise our own children, (except a small few who care and want things to someday be different ), we are arguing literally about a giant power struggle which is like a tug of war over a mud pit. What you’re all missing is we aren’t tugging on either side, because we are the mud…

Except, imagine that management said you had to buy $7000 worth of soda from that machine per year or we’ll fine you thousands of dollars. And you can’t bring your own drinks to work anymore with you, because they don’t comply with your company’s soda policy. Oh, and for all the coworkers that can’t afford to buy the soda, you’ll have to take extra money out of your paycheck and buy them the portion of their soda they can’t afford. Oh yeah, and you’ll also have to fund their abortions.

These analogies are quite humorous and really illustrate the powerful differences in the views of this subject, as well as the way many people respond to reality… ‘there is no such thing as diet fresca’ holy crap hilarious… but, if you consider that America is just a giant corporation, I just can’t understand why anyone is surprised and appalled by it. It’s just business. (Let me see your shocked face) As long as there are consumers in a capitalist nation, there will be those who take advantage of it. Maybe greed, power, sociopathic business and personal attitudes are just flat the way it is in this country. We’re slaves to paper and don’t raise our own children, (except a small few who care and want things to someday be different ), we are arguing literally about a giant power struggle which is like a tug of war over a mud pit. What you’re all missing is we aren’t tugging on either side, because we are the mud…

USA is the only first world country not to have free health care!! European Union living standard is much higher and they ALL have free government health care… They are also some of the happiest countries on Earth…

USA is the only first world country not to have free health care!! European Union living standard is much higher and they ALL have free government health care… They are also some of the happiest countries on Earth…

And also, (contrary to some popular miseducation and the basic ability to tell the difference between truth and fiction), There is no MANDATE that employees have to drink THAT soda…they are free to drink any beverages they decide are better for them. it’s more like, Say Bill’s company also has some employees that only make minimum wage and can’t afford lunches for themselves and their families AND still make ends meet. The company decides to give those lower paid employees hot lunches by using the money made by the soda machine, the one being used in the FREE WILL employee lounge, not the YOU HAVE TO DRINK THE KOOLAID employee lounge. Face it, Bill would do anything to get his own way, including stealing hot lunches from kids. Bill is a petulant douche bag who needs to be fired.

And also, (contrary to some popular miseducation and the basic ability to tell the difference between truth and fiction), There is no MANDATE that employees have to drink THAT soda…they are free to drink any beverages they decide are better for them. it’s more like, Say Bill’s company also has some employees that only make minimum wage and can’t afford lunches for themselves and their families AND still make ends meet. The company decides to give those lower paid employees hot lunches by using the money made by the soda machine, the one being used in the FREE WILL employee lounge, not the YOU HAVE TO DRINK THE KOOLAID employee lounge. Face it, Bill would do anything to get his own way, including stealing hot lunches from kids. Bill is a petulant douche bag who needs to be fired.

And also, (contrary to some popular miseducation and the basic ability to tell the difference between truth and fiction), There is no MANDATE that employees have to drink THAT soda…they are free to drink any beverages they decide are better for them. it’s more like, Say Bill’s company also has some employees that only make minimum wage and can’t afford lunches for themselves and their families AND still make ends meet. The company decides to give those lower paid employees hot lunches by using the money made by the soda machine, the one being used in the FREE WILL employee lounge, not the YOU HAVE TO DRINK THE KOOLAID employee lounge. Face it, Bill would do anything to get his own way, including stealing hot lunches from kids. Bill is a petulant douche bag who needs to be fired.

Actually I have enjoyed the way the each side is attempting to display their take on what is going on. It is a bit more ” civil” shall we say then many of the things I’m reading. Think of it this way. Remember when they decided to require all drivers to have care insurance. Those who elected not to work causing on due to stress on government funds and those who were buying insurance. This is but one of the future benefits equalizing pricing and making all insurance affordable because everyone should have it. If you elect not to have insurance there is a mere $95 fine this year. That will go up in the years to follow but it gives you time to investigate and determine what is right for you. Having more people buying insurance aids in more affordable.

Actually I have enjoyed the way the each side is attempting to display their take on what is going on. It is a bit more ” civil” shall we say then many of the things I’m reading. Think of it this way. Remember when they decided to require all drivers to have care insurance. Those who elected not to work causing on due to stress on government funds and those who were buying insurance. This is but one of the future benefits equalizing pricing and making all insurance affordable because everyone should have it. If you elect not to have insurance there is a mere $95 fine this year. That will go up in the years to follow but it gives you time to investigate and determine what is right for you. Having more people buying insurance aids in more affordable.

Actually I have enjoyed the way the each side is attempting to display their take on what is going on. It is a bit more ” civil” shall we say then many of the things I’m reading. Think of it this way. Remember when they decided to require all drivers to have care insurance. Those who elected not to work causing on due to stress on government funds and those who were buying insurance. This is but one of the future benefits equalizing pricing and making all insurance affordable because everyone should have it. If you elect not to have insurance there is a mere $95 fine this year. That will go up in the years to follow but it gives you time to investigate and determine what is right for you. Having more people buying insurance aids in more affordable.

I don’t know … before the soda machine was introduced, I used to pay $5.25 for soda … now that it is in existence, I will only pay $2.25 for my soda insurance! That’s a huge reduction for me … and the deposit (deductible) used to be $5K. Now, it’s only $2K … maybe the company and employees need to do more research before blatantly rejecting the soda machine!!

I don’t know … before the soda machine was introduced, I used to pay $5.25 for soda … now that it is in existence, I will only pay $2.25 for my soda insurance! That’s a huge reduction for me … and the deposit (deductible) used to be $5K. Now, it’s only $2K … maybe the company and employees need to do more research before blatantly rejecting the soda machine!!

The whole issue is very simple we are a country that has freedom of choice and the ACA takes away your freedom of choice, if you want someone too pay your way move to a country that gives you no choice

The whole issue is very simple we are a country that has freedom of choice and the ACA takes away your freedom of choice, if you want someone too pay your way move to a country that gives you no choice

The whole issue is very simple we are a country that has freedom of choice and the ACA takes away your freedom of choice, if you want someone too pay your way move to a country that gives you no choice

A very important part of this story was left out. Brian please add:
– Every single employee will be required to purchase soda each lunch day from this machine once it’s installed, you have no choice. Employees who do not purchase their soda from this machine will pay a monetary penalty.

Q: What if some employees drink water instead?
A: We’re telling you you’ll drink soda because we know what’s best for you. You have no choice in the matter. Buy soda or pay a fine.

A very important part of this story was left out. Brian please add:
– Every single employee will be required to purchase soda each lunch day from this machine once it’s installed, you have no choice. Employees who do not purchase their soda from this machine will pay a monetary penalty.

Q: What if some employees drink water instead?
A: We’re telling you you’ll drink soda because we know what’s best for you. You have no choice in the matter. Buy soda or pay a fine.

Suppose after the soda machine was delivered, the employees to their dismay were told they MUST buy at least one can of soda a day or be penalized with a tax. Upper management and their staff are exempted from this tax, although they will be in charge of administrating the penalties. Low level workers will also be required to subsidize upper management and their staffs soda’s. This is not what these employees originally voted for.the soda machine should be THROWN OUT!

A very important part of this story was left out. Brian please add:
– Every single employee will be required to purchase soda each lunch day from this machine once it’s installed, you have no choice. Employees who do not purchase their soda from this machine will pay a monetary penalty.

Q: What if some employees drink water instead?
A: We’re telling you you’ll drink soda because we know what’s best for you. You have no choice in the matter. Buy soda or pay a fine.

Suppose after the soda machine was delivered, the employees to their dismay were told they MUST buy at least one can of soda a day or be penalized with a tax. Upper management and their staff are exempted from this tax, although they will be in charge of administrating the penalties. Low level workers will also be required to subsidize upper management and their staffs soda’s. This is not what these employees originally voted for.the soda machine should be THROWN OUT!

Seriously, name one program the US Government runs well or efficiently in the black. You won’t be able to because there isn’t one. Not one…sorry, I will figure out my own health needs. Based on a review of the new plans my private health insurance is 30% less than the ACA options. Am I surprised… not one bit.

Seriously, name one program the US Government runs well or efficiently in the black. You won’t be able to because there isn’t one. Not one…sorry, I will figure out my own health needs. Based on a review of the new plans my private health insurance is 30% less than the ACA options. Am I surprised… not one bit.

Seriously, name one program the US Government runs well or efficiently in the black. You won’t be able to because there isn’t one. Not one…sorry, I will figure out my own health needs. Based on a review of the new plans my private health insurance is 30% less than the ACA options. Am I surprised… not one bit.

Even when it comes to something as basic, and apparently as simple and straightforward, as the question of who shut down the federal government, there are diametrically opposite answers, depending on whether you talk to Democrats or to Republicans.

There is really nothing complicated about the facts. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted all the money required to keep all government activities going — except for ObamaCare.

This is not a matter of opinion. You can check the Congressional Record.
As for the House of Representatives’ right to grant or withhold money, that is not a matter of opinion either. You can check the Constitution of the United States. All spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives, which means that Congressmen there have a right to decide whether or not they want to spend money on a particular government activity.

Whether ObamaCare is good, bad or indifferent is a matter of opinion. But it is a matter of fact that members of the House of Representatives have a right to make spending decisions based on their opinion.
ObamaCare is indeed “the law of the land,” as its supporters keep saying, and the Supreme Court has upheld its Constitutionality.
But the whole point of having a division of powers within the federal government is that each branch can decide independently what it wants to do or not do, regardless of what the other branches do, when exercising the powers specifically granted to that branch by the Constitution.

The hundreds of thousands of government workers who have been laid off are not idle because the House of Representatives did not vote enough money to pay their salaries or the other expenses of their agencies — unless they are in an agency that would administer ObamaCare.
Since we cannot read minds, we cannot say who — if anybody — “wants to shut down the government.” But we do know who had the option to keep the government running and chose not to. The money voted by the House of Representatives covered everything that the government does, except for ObamaCare.

The Senate chose not to vote to authorize that money to be spent, because it did not include money for ObamaCare. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says that he wants a “clean” bill from the House of Representatives, and some in the media keep repeating the word “clean” like a mantra. But what is unclean about not giving Harry Reid everything he wants?

If Senator Reid and President Obama refuse to accept the money required to run the government, because it leaves out the money they want to run ObamaCare, that is their right. But that is also their responsibility.

You cannot blame other people for not giving you everything you want. And it is a fraud to blame them when you refuse to use the money they did vote, even when it is ample to pay for everything else in the government.

When Barack Obama keeps claiming that it is some new outrage for those who control the money to try to change government policy by granting or withholding money, that is simply a bald-faced lie. You can check the history of other examples of “legislation by appropriation” as it used to be called.

Whether legislation by appropriation is a good idea or a bad idea is a matter of opinion. But whether it is both legal and not unprecedented is a matter of fact.

Perhaps the biggest of the big lies is that the government will not be able to pay what it owes on the national debt, creating a danger of default. Tax money keeps coming into the Treasury during the shutdown, and it vastly exceeds the interest that has to be paid on the national debt.

Even if the debt ceiling is not lifted, that only means that government is not allowed to run up new debt. But that does not mean that it is unable to pay the interest on existing debt.

Even when it comes to something as basic, and apparently as simple and straightforward, as the question of who shut down the federal government, there are diametrically opposite answers, depending on whether you talk to Democrats or to Republicans.

There is really nothing complicated about the facts. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted all the money required to keep all government activities going — except for ObamaCare.

This is not a matter of opinion. You can check the Congressional Record.
As for the House of Representatives’ right to grant or withhold money, that is not a matter of opinion either. You can check the Constitution of the United States. All spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives, which means that Congressmen there have a right to decide whether or not they want to spend money on a particular government activity.

Whether ObamaCare is good, bad or indifferent is a matter of opinion. But it is a matter of fact that members of the House of Representatives have a right to make spending decisions based on their opinion.
ObamaCare is indeed “the law of the land,” as its supporters keep saying, and the Supreme Court has upheld its Constitutionality.
But the whole point of having a division of powers within the federal government is that each branch can decide independently what it wants to do or not do, regardless of what the other branches do, when exercising the powers specifically granted to that branch by the Constitution.

The hundreds of thousands of government workers who have been laid off are not idle because the House of Representatives did not vote enough money to pay their salaries or the other expenses of their agencies — unless they are in an agency that would administer ObamaCare.
Since we cannot read minds, we cannot say who — if anybody — “wants to shut down the government.” But we do know who had the option to keep the government running and chose not to. The money voted by the House of Representatives covered everything that the government does, except for ObamaCare.

The Senate chose not to vote to authorize that money to be spent, because it did not include money for ObamaCare. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says that he wants a “clean” bill from the House of Representatives, and some in the media keep repeating the word “clean” like a mantra. But what is unclean about not giving Harry Reid everything he wants?

If Senator Reid and President Obama refuse to accept the money required to run the government, because it leaves out the money they want to run ObamaCare, that is their right. But that is also their responsibility.

You cannot blame other people for not giving you everything you want. And it is a fraud to blame them when you refuse to use the money they did vote, even when it is ample to pay for everything else in the government.

When Barack Obama keeps claiming that it is some new outrage for those who control the money to try to change government policy by granting or withholding money, that is simply a bald-faced lie. You can check the history of other examples of “legislation by appropriation” as it used to be called.

Whether legislation by appropriation is a good idea or a bad idea is a matter of opinion. But whether it is both legal and not unprecedented is a matter of fact.

Perhaps the biggest of the big lies is that the government will not be able to pay what it owes on the national debt, creating a danger of default. Tax money keeps coming into the Treasury during the shutdown, and it vastly exceeds the interest that has to be paid on the national debt.

Even if the debt ceiling is not lifted, that only means that government is not allowed to run up new debt. But that does not mean that it is unable to pay the interest on existing debt.

After reading this article and reading quit a few of the comments I am surprised how people are missing the big picture. Everybody is arguing about specific issues about this.But there’s two things:

1) The governments job is NOT to mommy people. It is to establish justice and promote the common welfare.

2) Most things in life that seem like a great idea at the moment, end up having some type of consequence later on.
i.e. drugs, DUI, sex, buying that new car. Most of the things done in this country are based on a persons feelings of “does it feel good”. That’s exactly what Obama care is: it’s a feel good bill. “Lets help the poor!” That’s hard to argue with because nobody wants to see people suffer. However, if we look long term, we can see some of the consequences: how is this bill going to be funded? Right now we say everyone is “pitching in”. But lets be honest, the guy making 30 K / year is not going to be contributing as much as the guy who makes 100K+ / year. Now most people justify this by saying this is fair. So as more and more people see they don’t have to work as hard to survive, they may start slacking off. Not to mention a lot of peoples hours are being cut because companies can’t afford to keep them full time, so people will start making LESS money and still have a hard time contributing to the ACA. So who’s going to pay then? The rich people will! Eventually, the rich people will become fed up with how much money is being taken from them, and they will LEAVE the country. Don’t believe me? Look at France, California, Detroit, Venezuela. Then who’s going to be left? The poor people will. So who’s going to pay for the ACA and all the wellfare? The poor people! But wait! They’re poor so they can’t afford it. Then a revolution breaks out because the government isn’t making nearly enough so they raise taxes (now on the poor people) and people get pissed off.

3) The United States is an equal opportunity, capitalistic system. That does not mean that everyone starts at the same level. NO! That means, it doesn’t matter if you’re rich or poor, black or white, you still have the same opportunity to live the “American dream”. Just because you’re poor doesn’t mean you have to stay poor. If you’re willing to work and do what it takes, you can do almost anything. Look at stories about people coming to the US without a cent to their name. They didn’t complain that the government wasn’t feeding and housing them. Instead, the gladly accepted that minimum wage job just so they could buy food to keep their kids alive. Some would work 80 hour work weeks. If you’re running a company, would you rather hire the guy who thinks he’s entitled to your money? or the guy who wants to work for your money. The entitled guy will think he will get paid no matter how good his work is. The guy who works for the money will put his whole effort into what he’s doing.

The United States is the greatest country in the world. Let’s try and keep it that way.
God bless America

Even when it comes to something as basic, and apparently as simple and straightforward, as the question of who shut down the federal government, there are diametrically opposite answers, depending on whether you talk to Democrats or to Republicans.

There is really nothing complicated about the facts. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted all the money required to keep all government activities going — except for ObamaCare.

This is not a matter of opinion. You can check the Congressional Record.
As for the House of Representatives’ right to grant or withhold money, that is not a matter of opinion either. You can check the Constitution of the United States. All spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives, which means that Congressmen there have a right to decide whether or not they want to spend money on a particular government activity.

Whether ObamaCare is good, bad or indifferent is a matter of opinion. But it is a matter of fact that members of the House of Representatives have a right to make spending decisions based on their opinion.
ObamaCare is indeed “the law of the land,” as its supporters keep saying, and the Supreme Court has upheld its Constitutionality.
But the whole point of having a division of powers within the federal government is that each branch can decide independently what it wants to do or not do, regardless of what the other branches do, when exercising the powers specifically granted to that branch by the Constitution.

The hundreds of thousands of government workers who have been laid off are not idle because the House of Representatives did not vote enough money to pay their salaries or the other expenses of their agencies — unless they are in an agency that would administer ObamaCare.
Since we cannot read minds, we cannot say who — if anybody — “wants to shut down the government.” But we do know who had the option to keep the government running and chose not to. The money voted by the House of Representatives covered everything that the government does, except for ObamaCare.

The Senate chose not to vote to authorize that money to be spent, because it did not include money for ObamaCare. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says that he wants a “clean” bill from the House of Representatives, and some in the media keep repeating the word “clean” like a mantra. But what is unclean about not giving Harry Reid everything he wants?

If Senator Reid and President Obama refuse to accept the money required to run the government, because it leaves out the money they want to run ObamaCare, that is their right. But that is also their responsibility.

You cannot blame other people for not giving you everything you want. And it is a fraud to blame them when you refuse to use the money they did vote, even when it is ample to pay for everything else in the government.

When Barack Obama keeps claiming that it is some new outrage for those who control the money to try to change government policy by granting or withholding money, that is simply a bald-faced lie. You can check the history of other examples of “legislation by appropriation” as it used to be called.

Whether legislation by appropriation is a good idea or a bad idea is a matter of opinion. But whether it is both legal and not unprecedented is a matter of fact.

Perhaps the biggest of the big lies is that the government will not be able to pay what it owes on the national debt, creating a danger of default. Tax money keeps coming into the Treasury during the shutdown, and it vastly exceeds the interest that has to be paid on the national debt.

Even if the debt ceiling is not lifted, that only means that government is not allowed to run up new debt. But that does not mean that it is unable to pay the interest on existing debt.

After reading this article and reading quit a few of the comments I am surprised how people are missing the big picture. Everybody is arguing about specific issues about this.But there’s two things:

1) The governments job is NOT to mommy people. It is to establish justice and promote the common welfare.

2) Most things in life that seem like a great idea at the moment, end up having some type of consequence later on.
i.e. drugs, DUI, sex, buying that new car. Most of the things done in this country are based on a persons feelings of “does it feel good”. That’s exactly what Obama care is: it’s a feel good bill. “Lets help the poor!” That’s hard to argue with because nobody wants to see people suffer. However, if we look long term, we can see some of the consequences: how is this bill going to be funded? Right now we say everyone is “pitching in”. But lets be honest, the guy making 30 K / year is not going to be contributing as much as the guy who makes 100K+ / year. Now most people justify this by saying this is fair. So as more and more people see they don’t have to work as hard to survive, they may start slacking off. Not to mention a lot of peoples hours are being cut because companies can’t afford to keep them full time, so people will start making LESS money and still have a hard time contributing to the ACA. So who’s going to pay then? The rich people will! Eventually, the rich people will become fed up with how much money is being taken from them, and they will LEAVE the country. Don’t believe me? Look at France, California, Detroit, Venezuela. Then who’s going to be left? The poor people will. So who’s going to pay for the ACA and all the wellfare? The poor people! But wait! They’re poor so they can’t afford it. Then a revolution breaks out because the government isn’t making nearly enough so they raise taxes (now on the poor people) and people get pissed off.

3) The United States is an equal opportunity, capitalistic system. That does not mean that everyone starts at the same level. NO! That means, it doesn’t matter if you’re rich or poor, black or white, you still have the same opportunity to live the “American dream”. Just because you’re poor doesn’t mean you have to stay poor. If you’re willing to work and do what it takes, you can do almost anything. Look at stories about people coming to the US without a cent to their name. They didn’t complain that the government wasn’t feeding and housing them. Instead, the gladly accepted that minimum wage job just so they could buy food to keep their kids alive. Some would work 80 hour work weeks. If you’re running a company, would you rather hire the guy who thinks he’s entitled to your money? or the guy who wants to work for your money. The entitled guy will think he will get paid no matter how good his work is. The guy who works for the money will put his whole effort into what he’s doing.

The United States is the greatest country in the world. Let’s try and keep it that way.
God bless America

Bill from accounting realizes that the soda machine will cost the company $2 Trillion dollars and guess what they don’t have it since they are already so far in debt. The CEO thinks money is made on trees and he can keep raising the debt ceiling of the company. However since the credit rating of the Company is so low the interest rates are going through the roof. Oh and did he tell you that he is borrowing from their biggest competitor who is stealing more jobs than the CEO has ever created. So Bill finally had a very public forum to educate all the other employees that soon there will be no money to pay the debts or the suppliers to fill the soda machine, the electricity company to power the soda machine, or even the space to keep the machine. So soon all the employees who followed their parents, and who followed their parents footsteps will soon have no where to work. Oh but wait the CEO says he will remove the coffee machines, water fountains, and not allow outside drinks in the office. He will also charge the managers more for soda to cover the cost of the soda machine. Brilliant, not so fast, soon the Directors and Managers won’t have any money since they will keep getting charged more and more. Now here is the kicker. The CEO knows too soda is bad for you. So he makes a rule that the executives and himself are can bring in their bottled water to ensure they stay healthy and not dependent on the soda machine for hydration, even though he knows it cost to much and will have all sorts of bad effects on his workers. Guess what they are public company, Bill is now calling on the shareholders, and they too see the writing on the walll and behind Bill 110%. Time to stop investing, time to close the books, and make the CEO stop making bad decisions. Now before you say Bill is a republican, he is a social liberal but financial conservative. He learned at a very young age you need to work for what you have and not suck on the gov’t nipple, and only pay for stuff when you have the money. He is actually ok with a Soda, but the office gabbers don’t like Bill, so they keep saying Bill just hates soda and hates the teams in the marketing, supply chain, and the warehouse. All the workers are to busy working and don’t have time to really listen to Bill. The best thing that happened for the workers they are now at home since the CEO decided to make them take a mandatory unpaid vacation, Guess what, they now have time to see through the lies of the CEO, and hopefully they will go get another job with better financial values or help fire their current CEO.

Bill from accounting realizes that the soda machine will cost the company $2 Trillion dollars and guess what they don’t have it since they are already so far in debt. The CEO thinks money is made on trees and he can keep raising the debt ceiling of the company. However since the credit rating of the Company is so low the interest rates are going through the roof. Oh and did he tell you that he is borrowing from their biggest competitor who is stealing more jobs than the CEO has ever created. So Bill finally had a very public forum to educate all the other employees that soon there will be no money to pay the debts or the suppliers to fill the soda machine, the electricity company to power the soda machine, or even the space to keep the machine. So soon all the employees who followed their parents, and who followed their parents footsteps will soon have no where to work. Oh but wait the CEO says he will remove the coffee machines, water fountains, and not allow outside drinks in the office. He will also charge the managers more for soda to cover the cost of the soda machine. Brilliant, not so fast, soon the Directors and Managers won’t have any money since they will keep getting charged more and more. Now here is the kicker. The CEO knows too soda is bad for you. So he makes a rule that the executives and himself are can bring in their bottled water to ensure they stay healthy and not dependent on the soda machine for hydration, even though he knows it cost to much and will have all sorts of bad effects on his workers. Guess what they are public company, Bill is now calling on the shareholders, and they too see the writing on the walll and behind Bill 110%. Time to stop investing, time to close the books, and make the CEO stop making bad decisions. Now before you say Bill is a republican, he is a social liberal but financial conservative. He learned at a very young age you need to work for what you have and not suck on the gov’t nipple, and only pay for stuff when you have the money. He is actually ok with a Soda, but the office gabbers don’t like Bill, so they keep saying Bill just hates soda and hates the teams in the marketing, supply chain, and the warehouse. All the workers are to busy working and don’t have time to really listen to Bill. The best thing that happened for the workers they are now at home since the CEO decided to make them take a mandatory unpaid vacation, Guess what, they now have time to see through the lies of the CEO, and hopefully they will go get another job with better financial values or help fire their current CEO.

Bill from accounting realizes that the soda machine will cost the company $2 Trillion dollars and guess what they don’t have it since they are already so far in debt. The CEO thinks money is made on trees and he can keep raising the debt ceiling of the company. However since the credit rating of the Company is so low the interest rates are going through the roof. Oh and did he tell you that he is borrowing from their biggest competitor who is stealing more jobs than the CEO has ever created. So Bill finally had a very public forum to educate all the other employees that soon there will be no money to pay the debts or the suppliers to fill the soda machine, the electricity company to power the soda machine, or even the space to keep the machine. So soon all the employees who followed their parents, and who followed their parents footsteps will soon have no where to work. Oh but wait the CEO says he will remove the coffee machines, water fountains, and not allow outside drinks in the office. He will also charge the managers more for soda to cover the cost of the soda machine. Brilliant, not so fast, soon the Directors and Managers won’t have any money since they will keep getting charged more and more. Now here is the kicker. The CEO knows too soda is bad for you. So he makes a rule that the executives and himself are can bring in their bottled water to ensure they stay healthy and not dependent on the soda machine for hydration, even though he knows it cost to much and will have all sorts of bad effects on his workers. Guess what they are public company, Bill is now calling on the shareholders, and they too see the writing on the walll and behind Bill 110%. Time to stop investing, time to close the books, and make the CEO stop making bad decisions. Now before you say Bill is a republican, he is a social liberal but financial conservative. He learned at a very young age you need to work for what you have and not suck on the gov’t nipple, and only pay for stuff when you have the money. He is actually ok with a Soda, but the office gabbers don’t like Bill, so they keep saying Bill just hates soda and hates the teams in the marketing, supply chain, and the warehouse. All the workers are to busy working and don’t have time to really listen to Bill. The best thing that happened for the workers they are now at home since the CEO decided to make them take a mandatory unpaid vacation, Guess what, they now have time to see through the lies of the CEO, and hopefully they will go get another job with better financial values or help fire their current CEO.

okay for some. yeah your rates initially will be a bit higher than they currently are and for others it will be a lot less. A trillion dollars over the next 10 years if you take and divide that by the 10 years and then divide that by what ?
300 million the current population of the US. That amounts to about 34 cents for every man woman and child. You will be paying according to your income bracket. This is nothing new or unusual. take a look before you go of on your tangents. but you say I got a 6k dollar deductible and I have to pay 174 a month. Well that may be true in your case. In my case I will have a 6k dollar deductible and pay 74 dollars a month and actually have healthcare and not have to rely on someone else to give me that healthcare when I end up in the hospital and do not have insurance. It costs a lot more when I end up having to go to the hospital without coverage and it has cost tax payers many millions more per year to keep trying to patch a broken healthcare system. So yes it took me a while to see what was going on even after I read 1,997 pages of the law as it was written with all the lawyer mumbo jumbo and what nots that would make most of your heads spin like the girl on poltergeist. An I did not read the additional 35k pages of changes and amendments and exemptions that were added onto it. I’ve heard both sides of the issue time and time again. So I actually went onto my state’s insurance exchange site and checked it and what I would have to pay and what i would get and well the trade off sounds pretty good from where I am sitting and by the way I served this country and I pay my taxes too.

okay for some. yeah your rates initially will be a bit higher than they currently are and for others it will be a lot less. A trillion dollars over the next 10 years if you take and divide that by the 10 years and then divide that by what ?
300 million the current population of the US. That amounts to about 34 cents for every man woman and child. You will be paying according to your income bracket. This is nothing new or unusual. take a look before you go of on your tangents. but you say I got a 6k dollar deductible and I have to pay 174 a month. Well that may be true in your case. In my case I will have a 6k dollar deductible and pay 74 dollars a month and actually have healthcare and not have to rely on someone else to give me that healthcare when I end up in the hospital and do not have insurance. It costs a lot more when I end up having to go to the hospital without coverage and it has cost tax payers many millions more per year to keep trying to patch a broken healthcare system. So yes it took me a while to see what was going on even after I read 1,997 pages of the law as it was written with all the lawyer mumbo jumbo and what nots that would make most of your heads spin like the girl on poltergeist. An I did not read the additional 35k pages of changes and amendments and exemptions that were added onto it. I’ve heard both sides of the issue time and time again. So I actually went onto my state’s insurance exchange site and checked it and what I would have to pay and what i would get and well the trade off sounds pretty good from where I am sitting and by the way I served this country and I pay my taxes too.

okay for some. yeah your rates initially will be a bit higher than they currently are and for others it will be a lot less. A trillion dollars over the next 10 years if you take and divide that by the 10 years and then divide that by what ?
300 million the current population of the US. That amounts to about 34 cents for every man woman and child. You will be paying according to your income bracket. This is nothing new or unusual. take a look before you go of on your tangents. but you say I got a 6k dollar deductible and I have to pay 174 a month. Well that may be true in your case. In my case I will have a 6k dollar deductible and pay 74 dollars a month and actually have healthcare and not have to rely on someone else to give me that healthcare when I end up in the hospital and do not have insurance. It costs a lot more when I end up having to go to the hospital without coverage and it has cost tax payers many millions more per year to keep trying to patch a broken healthcare system. So yes it took me a while to see what was going on even after I read 1,997 pages of the law as it was written with all the lawyer mumbo jumbo and what nots that would make most of your heads spin like the girl on poltergeist. An I did not read the additional 35k pages of changes and amendments and exemptions that were added onto it. I’ve heard both sides of the issue time and time again. So I actually went onto my state’s insurance exchange site and checked it and what I would have to pay and what i would get and well the trade off sounds pretty good from where I am sitting and by the way I served this country and I pay my taxes too.

Nope, don’t think so. read it again. Its an attempt at an analogy which fails. First of all, this bill was passed in the Summer of 2009, by a Congress elected in the Fall of 2008. It was so very unpopular with the People that they replace a very large majority of the House of that Congress in the fall of 2010, and kept those changes intact in 2012.

In addition, the bill which was passed by a previous Congress has been altered significantly by “executive order, and these changes should be reviewed by Congress each year. In fact, all new laws our to be reviewed and refined by Congress until the problem is solved.

On top of this, there has been a long-held practice that one Congress can not obligate our future Congresses with funding obligations without re-authorization. This Congress is exercising this principal now. I support them, although I acknowledge its a tough way to go. But until Harry Reid is willing to open a Conference Committee to negotiate differences between the separate versions of bill, I think the House should stick to its guns. A Conference Committee is also a normal, often used, log-standing practice of Congress.

Nope, don’t think so. read it again. Its an attempt at an analogy which fails. First of all, this bill was passed in the Summer of 2009, by a Congress elected in the Fall of 2008. It was so very unpopular with the People that they replace a very large majority of the House of that Congress in the fall of 2010, and kept those changes intact in 2012.

In addition, the bill which was passed by a previous Congress has been altered significantly by “executive order, and these changes should be reviewed by Congress each year. In fact, all new laws our to be reviewed and refined by Congress until the problem is solved.

On top of this, there has been a long-held practice that one Congress can not obligate our future Congresses with funding obligations without re-authorization. This Congress is exercising this principal now. I support them, although I acknowledge its a tough way to go. But until Harry Reid is willing to open a Conference Committee to negotiate differences between the separate versions of bill, I think the House should stick to its guns. A Conference Committee is also a normal, often used, log-standing practice of Congress.

Nope, don’t think so. read it again. Its an attempt at an analogy which fails. First of all, this bill was passed in the Summer of 2009, by a Congress elected in the Fall of 2008. It was so very unpopular with the People that they replace a very large majority of the House of that Congress in the fall of 2010, and kept those changes intact in 2012.

In addition, the bill which was passed by a previous Congress has been altered significantly by “executive order, and these changes should be reviewed by Congress each year. In fact, all new laws our to be reviewed and refined by Congress until the problem is solved.

On top of this, there has been a long-held practice that one Congress can not obligate our future Congresses with funding obligations without re-authorization. This Congress is exercising this principal now. I support them, although I acknowledge its a tough way to go. But until Harry Reid is willing to open a Conference Committee to negotiate differences between the separate versions of bill, I think the House should stick to its guns. A Conference Committee is also a normal, often used, log-standing practice of Congress.

With just a few tweaks, this story bears a striking resemblance to what’s happening with the government shutdown and Obamacare!

1) The soda machine is linked into payroll knows if people purchase a soda from it each day or not. If they don’t it will take the money right out of their payroll.

2) The price for soda varies depending on who’s buying. The guys in the warehouse pay $.50 while the sales people pay $1.50.

3) The soda machine only has 3 types of soda, none of which are popular given the price.

4) You can bring your own soda in from home, but it can only be certain flavors. And if you bring in too much soda, you’ll be forced to put money into the soda machine anyway.

5) Bill is plural, and they represent more than half of the people in the office.

6) The Bills have refused to print the check to pay for the electricity line to the pop machine. But Harry over in IT likes his soda so much that he disabled the printers until the Bills agree to print the checks for the soda machine.

7) Harry refuses to allow the Bills to print any checks, even those for things like payroll and landscaping until he agrees to print the check for the soda machine electricity.

With just a few tweaks, this story bears a striking resemblance to what’s happening with the government shutdown and Obamacare!

1) The soda machine is linked into payroll knows if people purchase a soda from it each day or not. If they don’t it will take the money right out of their payroll.

2) The price for soda varies depending on who’s buying. The guys in the warehouse pay $.50 while the sales people pay $1.50.

3) The soda machine only has 3 types of soda, none of which are popular given the price.

4) You can bring your own soda in from home, but it can only be certain flavors. And if you bring in too much soda, you’ll be forced to put money into the soda machine anyway.

5) Bill is plural, and they represent more than half of the people in the office.

6) The Bills have refused to print the check to pay for the electricity line to the pop machine. But Harry over in IT likes his soda so much that he disabled the printers until the Bills agree to print the checks for the soda machine.

7) Harry refuses to allow the Bills to print any checks, even those for things like payroll and landscaping until he agrees to print the check for the soda machine electricity.

With just a few tweaks, this story bears a striking resemblance to what’s happening with the government shutdown and Obamacare!

1) The soda machine is linked into payroll knows if people purchase a soda from it each day or not. If they don’t it will take the money right out of their payroll.

2) The price for soda varies depending on who’s buying. The guys in the warehouse pay $.50 while the sales people pay $1.50.

3) The soda machine only has 3 types of soda, none of which are popular given the price.

4) You can bring your own soda in from home, but it can only be certain flavors. And if you bring in too much soda, you’ll be forced to put money into the soda machine anyway.

5) Bill is plural, and they represent more than half of the people in the office.

6) The Bills have refused to print the check to pay for the electricity line to the pop machine. But Harry over in IT likes his soda so much that he disabled the printers until the Bills agree to print the checks for the soda machine.

7) Harry refuses to allow the Bills to print any checks, even those for things like payroll and landscaping until he agrees to print the check for the soda machine electricity.

Management decides one day to install soda machines in the break room. The sodas will be more expensive than the ones you can get at the convenience store down the street and they will only sell diet Mello Yello. And they pass a new rule that prevents employees from bringing in their own drinks so you have to buy from the machines. More employees than not don’t like this idea when it’s proposed. Accounting hates the idea because the machines are expensive for the company to operate, the company is losing money in general, and will add to the company’s already large debt load.

Some time passes and even more employees come to realize that the machines are a bad idea. They ask the accounting dept to help since they have more pull with management. Accounting says, “OK, this soda machine thing is a terrible idea. It’s going to cost us too much money, the company is broke, and not everybody likes diet Mello Yello. We’re not going to print any checks to pay for this. We’ll pay our other bills and process payroll, but not the soda machines.” Management says, “No way, we’re going to put these soda machines in whether you like it or not. And you’re going to print the checks to pay the soda company”. Accounting says “This is a really bad idea, can we at least delay it for a while to think about it in more detail?” Management: “No. Pay for it right now or we’re going to close the company”. Accounting says “We don’t want that. Lets just get rid of the cheaper sodas that management it getting. That’s fair right?” Management. “Nope we’re going to close the company and not sign your paychecks until you agree to these soda machines. And we’re sending out a company memo blaming you for the employees not getting paid. “

LOL at all the people that are saying “once it is implemented it will all make sense, and provisions will be made to make it better”. I am sorry, but if a bill that is going to majorly effect my life and my pay (which by the way I have received 2 raises since they started taking money out of my paycheck for this bill and I now make 5 dollars less than what I did when I first started at my current job TWO years ago) I would like to know what is in it and what “provisions” the president is making to it. I don’t trust a bill that is over 20,000 pages long, anything with that many regulations scares the shit out of me! And if this healthcare bill is so stellar, than why does it exclude congress and members of the white house? Your government is constantly going against the constitution and running up the nations debt while trying to keep in your good graces by promising healthcare for all. Please. Please, someone please tell me how you can so blindly trust your government???

Management decides one day to install soda machines in the break room. The sodas will be more expensive than the ones you can get at the convenience store down the street and they will only sell diet Mello Yello. And they pass a new rule that prevents employees from bringing in their own drinks so you have to buy from the machines. More employees than not don’t like this idea when it’s proposed. Accounting hates the idea because the machines are expensive for the company to operate, the company is losing money in general, and will add to the company’s already large debt load.

Some time passes and even more employees come to realize that the machines are a bad idea. They ask the accounting dept to help since they have more pull with management. Accounting says, “OK, this soda machine thing is a terrible idea. It’s going to cost us too much money, the company is broke, and not everybody likes diet Mello Yello. We’re not going to print any checks to pay for this. We’ll pay our other bills and process payroll, but not the soda machines.” Management says, “No way, we’re going to put these soda machines in whether you like it or not. And you’re going to print the checks to pay the soda company”. Accounting says “This is a really bad idea, can we at least delay it for a while to think about it in more detail?” Management: “No. Pay for it right now or we’re going to close the company”. Accounting says “We don’t want that. Lets just get rid of the cheaper sodas that management it getting. That’s fair right?” Management. “Nope we’re going to close the company and not sign your paychecks until you agree to these soda machines. And we’re sending out a company memo blaming you for the employees not getting paid. “

LOL at all the people that are saying “once it is implemented it will all make sense, and provisions will be made to make it better”. I am sorry, but if a bill that is going to majorly effect my life and my pay (which by the way I have received 2 raises since they started taking money out of my paycheck for this bill and I now make 5 dollars less than what I did when I first started at my current job TWO years ago) I would like to know what is in it and what “provisions” the president is making to it. I don’t trust a bill that is over 20,000 pages long, anything with that many regulations scares the shit out of me! And if this healthcare bill is so stellar, than why does it exclude congress and members of the white house? Your government is constantly going against the constitution and running up the nations debt while trying to keep in your good graces by promising healthcare for all. Please. Please, someone please tell me how you can so blindly trust your government???

LOL at all the people that are saying “once it is implemented it will all make sense, and provisions will be made to make it better”. I am sorry, but if a bill that is going to majorly effect my life and my pay (which by the way I have received 2 raises since they started taking money out of my paycheck for this bill and I now make 5 dollars less than what I did when I first started at my current job TWO years ago) I would like to know what is in it and what “provisions” the president is making to it. I don’t trust a bill that is over 20,000 pages long, anything with that many regulations scares the shit out of me! And if this healthcare bill is so stellar, than why does it exclude congress and members of the white house? Your government is constantly going against the constitution and running up the nations debt while trying to keep in your good graces by promising healthcare for all. Please. Please, someone please tell me how you can so blindly trust your government???

I am not a Republican or a Democrat but an independent American voter who decides to vote for who I think will be a better leader for all of the people and for one who will find ways to make a peaceful world but one who will act decisively if the country is “really threatened”.

I get what both sides are trying to do but I also get clearly why the president doesn’t budge! Guys its not about Obama care or spending limits! It’s about that if he gives in this time on the shutdown, the next time these radical group of lawmakers will be tabling and attaching the repeal of “Rowe V Wade” and the freedom to choose and the Woman’s right to choose.
This is the at the heart of the matter! Don’t you get it!

I am not a Republican or a Democrat but an independent American voter who decides to vote for who I think will be a better leader for all of the people and for one who will find ways to make a peaceful world but one who will act decisively if the country is “really threatened”.

I get what both sides are trying to do but I also get clearly why the president doesn’t budge! Guys its not about Obama care or spending limits! It’s about that if he gives in this time on the shutdown, the next time these radical group of lawmakers will be tabling and attaching the repeal of “Rowe V Wade” and the freedom to choose and the Woman’s right to choose.
This is the at the heart of the matter! Don’t you get it!

I am not a Republican or a Democrat but an independent American voter who decides to vote for who I think will be a better leader for all of the people and for one who will find ways to make a peaceful world but one who will act decisively if the country is “really threatened”.

I get what both sides are trying to do but I also get clearly why the president doesn’t budge! Guys its not about Obama care or spending limits! It’s about that if he gives in this time on the shutdown, the next time these radical group of lawmakers will be tabling and attaching the repeal of “Rowe V Wade” and the freedom to choose and the Woman’s right to choose.
This is the at the heart of the matter! Don’t you get it!

Okay, so you people are stupid. If the ACA is such a great thing, then why is Congress, The Senate and staff, Obama, and other Unions pushing to be opted out of it? Why is it okay for Congress to pass a law that is forced upon the American people but exempt themselves from it? Which is ILLEGAL by the way. Its called the 28th Amendment. I was paying only $152.32 for great coverage through my employer. Now I cannot keep my DR., my plan and if I enroll in Obamacare, I will have to pay $795.00 a month with a $12,550 deductible. How the hell is that AFFORDABLE? Start paying attention to what is really going on and get your heads out of the sand.

Okay, so you people are stupid. If the ACA is such a great thing, then why is Congress, The Senate and staff, Obama, and other Unions pushing to be opted out of it? Why is it okay for Congress to pass a law that is forced upon the American people but exempt themselves from it? Which is ILLEGAL by the way. Its called the 28th Amendment. I was paying only $152.32 for great coverage through my employer. Now I cannot keep my DR., my plan and if I enroll in Obamacare, I will have to pay $795.00 a month with a $12,550 deductible. How the hell is that AFFORDABLE? Start paying attention to what is really going on and get your heads out of the sand.

So let’s say then, that this company was too large for a vote among the employees to be practical. So the CEO gathers his department heads, one each from Payroll, Accounts Receivable, Accounts Payable, Shipping & Receiving, Manufacturing, Production, Sales, Marketing, HR, and Research, and he tells these 10 department heads, “Go back to your departments, and poll your employees, and then come back and tell me what each department says. So these department heads go back and poll their departments, and in every case the vote is about 55-44, with 7 departments voting NO, and 3 departments voting YES. Then the day that these department heads are supposed to go back and report this to the CEO, the guy who who owns the Soda Machine Company says “Hey, if you go tell your CEO that everyone voted yes, I’ll give you each a portion of the revenue that the soda machine generates”. So lo and behold, all 10 department heads go to the CEO and tell him everyone wants a soda machine. Meanwhile, back in payroll, Bill is looking at the numbers and saying, wait a second, how could this vote have passed when I know for a fact that Payroll, Accounts Receivable, Accounts Payable, Shipping & Receiving, Manufacturing, Production, and Sales didn’t want it, and only Marketing, HR, and Research said yes. Bill thinks something is fishy here…

So let’s say then, that this company was too large for a vote among the employees to be practical. So the CEO gathers his department heads, one each from Payroll, Accounts Receivable, Accounts Payable, Shipping & Receiving, Manufacturing, Production, Sales, Marketing, HR, and Research, and he tells these 10 department heads, “Go back to your departments, and poll your employees, and then come back and tell me what each department says. So these department heads go back and poll their departments, and in every case the vote is about 55-44, with 7 departments voting NO, and 3 departments voting YES. Then the day that these department heads are supposed to go back and report this to the CEO, the guy who who owns the Soda Machine Company says “Hey, if you go tell your CEO that everyone voted yes, I’ll give you each a portion of the revenue that the soda machine generates”. So lo and behold, all 10 department heads go to the CEO and tell him everyone wants a soda machine. Meanwhile, back in payroll, Bill is looking at the numbers and saying, wait a second, how could this vote have passed when I know for a fact that Payroll, Accounts Receivable, Accounts Payable, Shipping & Receiving, Manufacturing, Production, and Sales didn’t want it, and only Marketing, HR, and Research said yes. Bill thinks something is fishy here…

Okay, so you people are stupid. If the ACA is such a great thing, then why is Congress, The Senate and staff, Obama, and other Unions pushing to be opted out of it? Why is it okay for Congress to pass a law that is forced upon the American people but exempt themselves from it? Which is ILLEGAL by the way. Its called the 28th Amendment. I was paying only $152.32 for great coverage through my employer. Now I cannot keep my DR., my plan and if I enroll in Obamacare, I will have to pay $795.00 a month with a $12,550 deductible. How the hell is that AFFORDABLE? Start paying attention to what is really going on and get your heads out of the sand.

“the soda machine was brought in originally because a vast majority of the workers were not able to afford a morning beverage or not willing to spend the money for one. Others were frustrated by the responsible employees that showed up each morning with a Starbucks Cappuccino and they felt that this wasn’t fair. The company decided for the sake of harmony, they would ask the employees if they would support a new morning beverage program….. The program would be based on the fact that everyone would have the right to continue drinking the same beverages that they always had in the past, while allowing those that couldn’t/wouldn’t bring a beverage to get one. It was accepted by a majority of employees.
The company took it to the board of directors for a vote. The board of directors consisted of 15 members and was overseen by an director. 9 members plus the director were the “Party Crowd” and never really Starbucks drinkers, but felt that everyone should be able to have one even if they didn’t want to pay full price. The other 6 members, (Including Bill) worked in “Accounting”. They understood the value of money and that everything has a cause and effect, and were extremely skeptical of the new Beverage Program.
Once the new beverage program (Machine) was adopted, the company policy, (Written by the “Party Crowd”) started to go into effect. Those that were bringing in Starbucks found that they could no longer do that, because Starbucks refused to serve them. The company decided to Charge a fee to Starbucks for all of the employees that couldn’t afford or didn’t want to spend the money for the cappuccino. Since “Accounting”, (Bill included) could no longer get their beverage, the “Party Crowd” told them that they would need to buy a soda from their machine, because the beverage program required them to have a daily drink. They were also informed that the cost of the beverage( X2) would be deducted from their pay if they chose not to purchase one. They also found that the original $1.00 soda was now going to cost them $5.00 and they have no choice on what they were going to get to drink…… and the company could deny them a drink at any time if they felt they didn’t need one.
Now that the new Beverage Program is starting and the employees are starting to realize that it is not going make their morning beverages more affordable and limits their choices, they are voicing the opposition to it. 2/3rds of the employees no longer support the beverage program, but the “Party Crowd” controls the board of directors, and will not listen to the “Accountants” when they tell them that the employees no longer support the beverage program as it is being implemented. And based on the Balance Sheet, the program is going to cause the company to go bankrupt and they will all lose their jobs.
Bill, being a responsible “Accountant” actually read the new directive that covers the Beverage Program and decided to support the MAJORITY of the employees that felt the “Party Crowd” misrepresented and no longer understood the repercussions the Beverage Program.
So, yeah….. Bill and “Accounting” is withholding our paychecks because the “Party Crowd” and Their Director do not want to admit that they never really understood the directives or the program they came up with and are afraid of being fired or being remembered as the guys that crashed XYZ Company.
Kick their ass Bill and save them from themselves!!!!!!!!!!

“the soda machine was brought in originally because a vast majority of the workers were not able to afford a morning beverage or not willing to spend the money for one. Others were frustrated by the responsible employees that showed up each morning with a Starbucks Cappuccino and they felt that this wasn’t fair. The company decided for the sake of harmony, they would ask the employees if they would support a new morning beverage program….. The program would be based on the fact that everyone would have the right to continue drinking the same beverages that they always had in the past, while allowing those that couldn’t/wouldn’t bring a beverage to get one. It was accepted by a majority of employees.
The company took it to the board of directors for a vote. The board of directors consisted of 15 members and was overseen by an director. 9 members plus the director were the “Party Crowd” and never really Starbucks drinkers, but felt that everyone should be able to have one even if they didn’t want to pay full price. The other 6 members, (Including Bill) worked in “Accounting”. They understood the value of money and that everything has a cause and effect, and were extremely skeptical of the new Beverage Program.
Once the new beverage program (Machine) was adopted, the company policy, (Written by the “Party Crowd”) started to go into effect. Those that were bringing in Starbucks found that they could no longer do that, because Starbucks refused to serve them. The company decided to Charge a fee to Starbucks for all of the employees that couldn’t afford or didn’t want to spend the money for the cappuccino. Since “Accounting”, (Bill included) could no longer get their beverage, the “Party Crowd” told them that they would need to buy a soda from their machine, because the beverage program required them to have a daily drink. They were also informed that the cost of the beverage( X2) would be deducted from their pay if they chose not to purchase one. They also found that the original $1.00 soda was now going to cost them $5.00 and they have no choice on what they were going to get to drink…… and the company could deny them a drink at any time if they felt they didn’t need one.
Now that the new Beverage Program is starting and the employees are starting to realize that it is not going make their morning beverages more affordable and limits their choices, they are voicing the opposition to it. 2/3rds of the employees no longer support the beverage program, but the “Party Crowd” controls the board of directors, and will not listen to the “Accountants” when they tell them that the employees no longer support the beverage program as it is being implemented. And based on the Balance Sheet, the program is going to cause the company to go bankrupt and they will all lose their jobs.
Bill, being a responsible “Accountant” actually read the new directive that covers the Beverage Program and decided to support the MAJORITY of the employees that felt the “Party Crowd” misrepresented and no longer understood the repercussions the Beverage Program.
So, yeah….. Bill and “Accounting” is withholding our paychecks because the “Party Crowd” and Their Director do not want to admit that they never really understood the directives or the program they came up with and are afraid of being fired or being remembered as the guys that crashed XYZ Company.
Kick their ass Bill and save them from themselves!!!!!!!!!!

“the soda machine was brought in originally because a vast majority of the workers were not able to afford a morning beverage or not willing to spend the money for one. Others were frustrated by the responsible employees that showed up each morning with a Starbucks Cappuccino and they felt that this wasn’t fair. The company decided for the sake of harmony, they would ask the employees if they would support a new morning beverage program….. The program would be based on the fact that everyone would have the right to continue drinking the same beverages that they always had in the past, while allowing those that couldn’t/wouldn’t bring a beverage to get one. It was accepted by a majority of employees.
The company took it to the board of directors for a vote. The board of directors consisted of 15 members and was overseen by an director. 9 members plus the director were the “Party Crowd” and never really Starbucks drinkers, but felt that everyone should be able to have one even if they didn’t want to pay full price. The other 6 members, (Including Bill) worked in “Accounting”. They understood the value of money and that everything has a cause and effect, and were extremely skeptical of the new Beverage Program.
Once the new beverage program (Machine) was adopted, the company policy, (Written by the “Party Crowd”) started to go into effect. Those that were bringing in Starbucks found that they could no longer do that, because Starbucks refused to serve them. The company decided to Charge a fee to Starbucks for all of the employees that couldn’t afford or didn’t want to spend the money for the cappuccino. Since “Accounting”, (Bill included) could no longer get their beverage, the “Party Crowd” told them that they would need to buy a soda from their machine, because the beverage program required them to have a daily drink. They were also informed that the cost of the beverage( X2) would be deducted from their pay if they chose not to purchase one. They also found that the original $1.00 soda was now going to cost them $5.00 and they have no choice on what they were going to get to drink…… and the company could deny them a drink at any time if they felt they didn’t need one.
Now that the new Beverage Program is starting and the employees are starting to realize that it is not going make their morning beverages more affordable and limits their choices, they are voicing the opposition to it. 2/3rds of the employees no longer support the beverage program, but the “Party Crowd” controls the board of directors, and will not listen to the “Accountants” when they tell them that the employees no longer support the beverage program as it is being implemented. And based on the Balance Sheet, the program is going to cause the company to go bankrupt and they will all lose their jobs.
Bill, being a responsible “Accountant” actually read the new directive that covers the Beverage Program and decided to support the MAJORITY of the employees that felt the “Party Crowd” misrepresented and no longer understood the repercussions the Beverage Program.
So, yeah….. Bill and “Accounting” is withholding our paychecks because the “Party Crowd” and Their Director do not want to admit that they never really understood the directives or the program they came up with and are afraid of being fired or being remembered as the guys that crashed XYZ Company.
Kick their ass Bill and save them from themselves!!!!!!!!!!

I’m Canadian and I am my brother’s keeper. I am 46, never sick, I have been to the hospital for medical emergencies around 10 times in my life and nothing very serious (something in the eye, vertigo, fractured ribs, etc) I have paid into the system way more than I received over my life. I can honestly say, I am proud to be a Canadian and to help in providing healthcare for those that were not as fortunate as myself. God gave me health, in return, I help his children in need of medical attention partly through the taxes I have paid. Americans have a terribly flawed healthcare system, we here in Canada have a great system with some flaws. I truely wish all you conservatives would look to us for answers because we have so much to offer you. We love our healthcare system and never, ever would we change what we have for what you had, nor would we change what we have for Obamacare as it is not universal.

I’m Canadian and I am my brother’s keeper. I am 46, never sick, I have been to the hospital for medical emergencies around 10 times in my life and nothing very serious (something in the eye, vertigo, fractured ribs, etc) I have paid into the system way more than I received over my life. I can honestly say, I am proud to be a Canadian and to help in providing healthcare for those that were not as fortunate as myself. God gave me health, in return, I help his children in need of medical attention partly through the taxes I have paid. Americans have a terribly flawed healthcare system, we here in Canada have a great system with some flaws. I truely wish all you conservatives would look to us for answers because we have so much to offer you. We love our healthcare system and never, ever would we change what we have for what you had, nor would we change what we have for Obamacare as it is not universal.

I’m Canadian and I am my brother’s keeper. I am 46, never sick, I have been to the hospital for medical emergencies around 10 times in my life and nothing very serious (something in the eye, vertigo, fractured ribs, etc) I have paid into the system way more than I received over my life. I can honestly say, I am proud to be a Canadian and to help in providing healthcare for those that were not as fortunate as myself. God gave me health, in return, I help his children in need of medical attention partly through the taxes I have paid. Americans have a terribly flawed healthcare system, we here in Canada have a great system with some flaws. I truely wish all you conservatives would look to us for answers because we have so much to offer you. We love our healthcare system and never, ever would we change what we have for what you had, nor would we change what we have for Obamacare as it is not universal.

Ok, so I like the analogy but I have noticed some posters going off into wild directions. The fact is our government passed a law that mandates each citizen purchase health insurance. No different than the mandates that exist for auto insurance. The law was passed in accordence with the procedures of our government and was then up held by the Supreme Court. One person or group cannot throw a fit and so, “no. no, no, I don’t like it, so you are al going to suffer until I get my way.”

Ok, so I like the analogy but I have noticed some posters going off into wild directions. The fact is our government passed a law that mandates each citizen purchase health insurance. No different than the mandates that exist for auto insurance. The law was passed in accordence with the procedures of our government and was then up held by the Supreme Court. One person or group cannot throw a fit and so, “no. no, no, I don’t like it, so you are al going to suffer until I get my way.”

Ok, so I like the analogy but I have noticed some posters going off into wild directions. The fact is our government passed a law that mandates each citizen purchase health insurance. No different than the mandates that exist for auto insurance. The law was passed in accordence with the procedures of our government and was then up held by the Supreme Court. One person or group cannot throw a fit and so, “no. no, no, I don’t like it, so you are al going to suffer until I get my way.”

Is the boss threatening to FINE anyone who doesn’t buy a soda? Is Sally from accounting in charge of determining how much each person is going to have to put in the machine in order to get a soda? If bob can’t afford a soda, are the rest of his co workers REQUIRED to buy bob a soda? Maybe Bill isn’t the jackass here…

Is the boss threatening to FINE anyone who doesn’t buy a soda? Is Sally from accounting in charge of determining how much each person is going to have to put in the machine in order to get a soda? If bob can’t afford a soda, are the rest of his co workers REQUIRED to buy bob a soda? Maybe Bill isn’t the jackass here…

Is the boss threatening to FINE anyone who doesn’t buy a soda? Is Sally from accounting in charge of determining how much each person is going to have to put in the machine in order to get a soda? If bob can’t afford a soda, are the rest of his co workers REQUIRED to buy bob a soda? Maybe Bill isn’t the jackass here…

Now imagine that that Bob in HR tells you that it is not fair to have a soda machine in the office if everyone cannot afford a soda. So now you must purchase a soda every week whether you drink it or not so that the less fortunate in your office may receive a ‘reduced price’ soda every day. Your timecard will now track how many sodas you purchased and your check will be garnished if you don’t. How much you hate Bill now?

Now imagine that that Bob in HR tells you that it is not fair to have a soda machine in the office if everyone cannot afford a soda. So now you must purchase a soda every week whether you drink it or not so that the less fortunate in your office may receive a ‘reduced price’ soda every day. Your timecard will now track how many sodas you purchased and your check will be garnished if you don’t. How much you hate Bill now?

Now imagine that that Bob in HR tells you that it is not fair to have a soda machine in the office if everyone cannot afford a soda. So now you must purchase a soda every week whether you drink it or not so that the less fortunate in your office may receive a ‘reduced price’ soda every day. Your timecard will now track how many sodas you purchased and your check will be garnished if you don’t. How much you hate Bill now?

Christopher lets really make it real life and say the soda machine has always been there and eveyone can get a soda whether they have money or not. People without change have just been opening the door and taking the sodas without paying for them. The group decides that they are going to arrange for the people without money to get help paying for the soda but they will still have to use a little of their own money. Now let’s say Bill has plenty of money but has no desire to help the people without money pay for something they have been getting without paying for….and so he shuts down the government because the couldn’t win after 45 tries and a trip to the Supreme Court!

Christopher lets really make it real life and say the soda machine has always been there and eveyone can get a soda whether they have money or not. People without change have just been opening the door and taking the sodas without paying for them. The group decides that they are going to arrange for the people without money to get help paying for the soda but they will still have to use a little of their own money. Now let’s say Bill has plenty of money but has no desire to help the people without money pay for something they have been getting without paying for….and so he shuts down the government because the couldn’t win after 45 tries and a trip to the Supreme Court!

Christopher lets really make it real life and say the soda machine has always been there and eveyone can get a soda whether they have money or not. People without change have just been opening the door and taking the sodas without paying for them. The group decides that they are going to arrange for the people without money to get help paying for the soda but they will still have to use a little of their own money. Now let’s say Bill has plenty of money but has no desire to help the people without money pay for something they have been getting without paying for….and so he shuts down the government because the couldn’t win after 45 tries and a trip to the Supreme Court!

Who’s paying for the soda machine? And how much does the soda cost? “We won’t tell you until it’s installed.” Then once it’s installed, you see a new $50 ‘beverage convenience fee’ deducted from each paycheck and you learn that the sodas cost $10 each. Oh and you can’t opt out. You have to buy at least 4 sodas per week. Bill isn’t looking so bad now, is he?

The problem with analogies in these situations is that they make it really easy to ignore and misuse facts. But then maybe that’s what you want, since the facts aren’t really on your side here.

Who’s paying for the soda machine? And how much does the soda cost? “We won’t tell you until it’s installed.” Then once it’s installed, you see a new $50 ‘beverage convenience fee’ deducted from each paycheck and you learn that the sodas cost $10 each. Oh and you can’t opt out. You have to buy at least 4 sodas per week. Bill isn’t looking so bad now, is he?

The problem with analogies in these situations is that they make it really easy to ignore and misuse facts. But then maybe that’s what you want, since the facts aren’t really on your side here.

The only argument I saw this analogy didn’t address is the Individual Mandate.

So suppose the office has no potable water. Say, nearby fracking has filled the taps with methane, which makes break time really fun as we all set fire to the tap water, but I digress…

Some people will say, “No problem, I’ll bring my water/beverages from home. I’ll still never use the soda machine.”

Except for those times that you forget to bring water from home, and we all will from time to time. Now you need to buy your beverage. With the soda machine, you can buy it right there in the office. Without it, you have to go 5 blocks down the street to the nearest store, which costs the company in lost time and productivity. Everyone pays because you were irresponsible and forgot your drink.

So instead, we now have a soda machine. The office even says they’ll subsidize your consumption; say, credits for a certain amount of free drinks each month.

The only argument I saw this analogy didn’t address is the Individual Mandate.

So suppose the office has no potable water. Say, nearby fracking has filled the taps with methane, which makes break time really fun as we all set fire to the tap water, but I digress…

Some people will say, “No problem, I’ll bring my water/beverages from home. I’ll still never use the soda machine.”

Except for those times that you forget to bring water from home, and we all will from time to time. Now you need to buy your beverage. With the soda machine, you can buy it right there in the office. Without it, you have to go 5 blocks down the street to the nearest store, which costs the company in lost time and productivity. Everyone pays because you were irresponsible and forgot your drink.

So instead, we now have a soda machine. The office even says they’ll subsidize your consumption; say, credits for a certain amount of free drinks each month.

The only argument I saw this analogy didn’t address is the Individual Mandate.

So suppose the office has no potable water. Say, nearby fracking has filled the taps with methane, which makes break time really fun as we all set fire to the tap water, but I digress…

Some people will say, “No problem, I’ll bring my water/beverages from home. I’ll still never use the soda machine.”

Except for those times that you forget to bring water from home, and we all will from time to time. Now you need to buy your beverage. With the soda machine, you can buy it right there in the office. Without it, you have to go 5 blocks down the street to the nearest store, which costs the company in lost time and productivity. Everyone pays because you were irresponsible and forgot your drink.

So instead, we now have a soda machine. The office even says they’ll subsidize your consumption; say, credits for a certain amount of free drinks each month.

The only problem is that the Company, in this analogy, does not have the funds to make payroll and pay for the soda machines. Bill must go borrow more money to make payroll. And, Bill sitting in accounting knows better than anyone else in the company what additional debt will do to the already over-leveraged company. Rather, Bill should tell the CEO, the company only so much money in its accounts and I will pay it out as you see fit, but I will not go borrow more money to jeopardize the company. When the company files bankruptcy, then nobody will receive a paycheck, no matter how much anyone wants to pay them.

The only problem is that the Company, in this analogy, does not have the funds to make payroll and pay for the soda machines. Bill must go borrow more money to make payroll. And, Bill sitting in accounting knows better than anyone else in the company what additional debt will do to the already over-leveraged company. Rather, Bill should tell the CEO, the company only so much money in its accounts and I will pay it out as you see fit, but I will not go borrow more money to jeopardize the company. When the company files bankruptcy, then nobody will receive a paycheck, no matter how much anyone wants to pay them.

The only problem is that the Company, in this analogy, does not have the funds to make payroll and pay for the soda machines. Bill must go borrow more money to make payroll. And, Bill sitting in accounting knows better than anyone else in the company what additional debt will do to the already over-leveraged company. Rather, Bill should tell the CEO, the company only so much money in its accounts and I will pay it out as you see fit, but I will not go borrow more money to jeopardize the company. When the company files bankruptcy, then nobody will receive a paycheck, no matter how much anyone wants to pay them.

OK, so now let’s imagine that the CEO overrides all the workers and committees and shareholders, decides that even though the machine costs ten times what was projected, and every soda is going to cost five bucks a can, that all executives are exempt from their contribution to it’s purchase. Then he delays charging all union members for their participation until after the next contract negotiations. Then the guys in shipping ralley a huge protest so they are exempted eventually as well. After three years of phasing in the new soda machine program, and after all the CEO’s favorite factions are exempted or subsidized or satisfied enough to insure his continued place on the board, it turns out that now there are only three guys in the building who are actually going to have to contribute to the project, and they don’t drink all that much soda, and in fact when they have felt a need for a drink at work, have cases of their own they’ve been bringing for 25 cents a can from Walmart for years…

OK, so now let’s imagine that the CEO overrides all the workers and committees and shareholders, decides that even though the machine costs ten times what was projected, and every soda is going to cost five bucks a can, that all executives are exempt from their contribution to it’s purchase. Then he delays charging all union members for their participation until after the next contract negotiations. Then the guys in shipping ralley a huge protest so they are exempted eventually as well. After three years of phasing in the new soda machine program, and after all the CEO’s favorite factions are exempted or subsidized or satisfied enough to insure his continued place on the board, it turns out that now there are only three guys in the building who are actually going to have to contribute to the project, and they don’t drink all that much soda, and in fact when they have felt a need for a drink at work, have cases of their own they’ve been bringing for 25 cents a can from Walmart for years…

OK, so now let’s imagine that the CEO overrides all the workers and committees and shareholders, decides that even though the machine costs ten times what was projected, and every soda is going to cost five bucks a can, that all executives are exempt from their contribution to it’s purchase. Then he delays charging all union members for their participation until after the next contract negotiations. Then the guys in shipping ralley a huge protest so they are exempted eventually as well. After three years of phasing in the new soda machine program, and after all the CEO’s favorite factions are exempted or subsidized or satisfied enough to insure his continued place on the board, it turns out that now there are only three guys in the building who are actually going to have to contribute to the project, and they don’t drink all that much soda, and in fact when they have felt a need for a drink at work, have cases of their own they’ve been bringing for 25 cents a can from Walmart for years…

Water would be a better symbol than soda since you can’t live very long or well without it. Also lets say the ubiquitous office water cooler is now $200 a cup. If you can’t afford it, there’s always the water from the sink which will run you $100/cup or if you still cant afford that, you can drink for free from the fire hydrant in the hallway, but that is not recommended since there is always a number of raging fires in the office and this emergency water should be reserved for that.

Water would be a better symbol than soda since you can’t live very long or well without it. Also lets say the ubiquitous office water cooler is now $200 a cup. If you can’t afford it, there’s always the water from the sink which will run you $100/cup or if you still cant afford that, you can drink for free from the fire hydrant in the hallway, but that is not recommended since there is always a number of raging fires in the office and this emergency water should be reserved for that.

Water would be a better symbol than soda since you can’t live very long or well without it. Also lets say the ubiquitous office water cooler is now $200 a cup. If you can’t afford it, there’s always the water from the sink which will run you $100/cup or if you still cant afford that, you can drink for free from the fire hydrant in the hallway, but that is not recommended since there is always a number of raging fires in the office and this emergency water should be reserved for that.

I’ve sat here for the better part of an hour reading the exchanges between dozens of strangers, and I come to one conclusion. There are some wicked smart people on this thread. You know your stuff, or at least as much as you can learn while juggling jobs, kids, etc., and you can make an argument.

My advice, run for office and unseat the compromising half-wits that are running our country.

I’ve sat here for the better part of an hour reading the exchanges between dozens of strangers, and I come to one conclusion. There are some wicked smart people on this thread. You know your stuff, or at least as much as you can learn while juggling jobs, kids, etc., and you can make an argument.

My advice, run for office and unseat the compromising half-wits that are running our country.

I’ve sat here for the better part of an hour reading the exchanges between dozens of strangers, and I come to one conclusion. There are some wicked smart people on this thread. You know your stuff, or at least as much as you can learn while juggling jobs, kids, etc., and you can make an argument.

My advice, run for office and unseat the compromising half-wits that are running our country.

Let me just tell you that Obamacare is just a light version of what we have I Norway. We’ve had a welfare state since the 50’s and it works! Not without some issues, but it gives everyone free healthcare so I will gladly pay what I already pay and even more as long as it goes to healthcare. You should care enough about your own countrymen as America the brave, not shut down the government and look like selfish children that doesn’t get what they want. I would say that real patriots should support every American getting proper healthcare!

Let me just tell you that Obamacare is just a light version of what we have I Norway. We’ve had a welfare state since the 50’s and it works! Not without some issues, but it gives everyone free healthcare so I will gladly pay what I already pay and even more as long as it goes to healthcare. You should care enough about your own countrymen as America the brave, not shut down the government and look like selfish children that doesn’t get what they want. I would say that real patriots should support every American getting proper healthcare!

Let me just tell you that Obamacare is just a light version of what we have I Norway. We’ve had a welfare state since the 50’s and it works! Not without some issues, but it gives everyone free healthcare so I will gladly pay what I already pay and even more as long as it goes to healthcare. You should care enough about your own countrymen as America the brave, not shut down the government and look like selfish children that doesn’t get what they want. I would say that real patriots should support every American getting proper healthcare!

Republicans offered to pass 12 of the 13 parts of the budget (we haven’t had a budget for 5 years by the way. Supposed to. Senate won’t propose one. Just want a pork barrel full of cash to divvy up. So much for Constitution.). Obama says NO. Everything or nothing. Make it hurt. Whose the jerk? Impeach the stinker. This isn’t compromise OR leadership.

Republicans offered to pass 12 of the 13 parts of the budget (we haven’t had a budget for 5 years by the way. Supposed to. Senate won’t propose one. Just want a pork barrel full of cash to divvy up. So much for Constitution.). Obama says NO. Everything or nothing. Make it hurt. Whose the jerk? Impeach the stinker. This isn’t compromise OR leadership.

Republicans offered to pass 12 of the 13 parts of the budget (we haven’t had a budget for 5 years by the way. Supposed to. Senate won’t propose one. Just want a pork barrel full of cash to divvy up. So much for Constitution.). Obama says NO. Everything or nothing. Make it hurt. Whose the jerk? Impeach the stinker. This isn’t compromise OR leadership.

Bad analogy. It should be no one was asked if they wanted the soda machine, the board of directors voted. In that vote the current soda machine that was priced at $1.50 a can will be removed and it will be a violation of policy if you buy from any other soda machine than the one provided by the company. Along with this new policy you will be forced to purchase soda, even if you dont want any. Not just one can, but four or five cans at a time. if you do not your pay will be docked. The price of each can of soda will increase anywhere between 40 and 300%. The diabetics of the company who can not drink the soda mandated by the Board of directors, will be forced to go ahead and drink it anyway, and will be offered burial benefits when they go into diabetic shock.

Bad analogy. It should be no one was asked if they wanted the soda machine, the board of directors voted. In that vote the current soda machine that was priced at $1.50 a can will be removed and it will be a violation of policy if you buy from any other soda machine than the one provided by the company. Along with this new policy you will be forced to purchase soda, even if you dont want any. Not just one can, but four or five cans at a time. if you do not your pay will be docked. The price of each can of soda will increase anywhere between 40 and 300%. The diabetics of the company who can not drink the soda mandated by the Board of directors, will be forced to go ahead and drink it anyway, and will be offered burial benefits when they go into diabetic shock.

The quality of US healthcare is ranked 37th in the world. Most Americans can’t be bothered with the pesky annoyances facts bring, anymore, but Google it. And, stop polluting the world with hyperbole and proselytization of Obamcare.

Accordingly, this post should read, “The boss took fucking Ford Fiestas and intended to force their sale on all his employees at a cost exceeding a red Ferrari. Bill, along with a large percentage of fellow employees, didn’t like it.

Here’s are more facts, the US health care is factually lower in quality and more expensive to Morocco, Chile or Cyprus, Norway, Portugal, Monaco and Greece on an average price of more than 1500%

Bad analogy. It should be no one was asked if they wanted the soda machine, the board of directors voted. In that vote the current soda machine that was priced at $1.50 a can will be removed and it will be a violation of policy if you buy from any other soda machine than the one provided by the company. Along with this new policy you will be forced to purchase soda, even if you dont want any. Not just one can, but four or five cans at a time. if you do not your pay will be docked. The price of each can of soda will increase anywhere between 40 and 300%. The diabetics of the company who can not drink the soda mandated by the Board of directors, will be forced to go ahead and drink it anyway, and will be offered burial benefits when they go into diabetic shock.

The quality of US healthcare is ranked 37th in the world. Most Americans can’t be bothered with the pesky annoyances facts bring, anymore, but Google it. And, stop polluting the world with hyperbole and proselytization of Obamcare.

Accordingly, this post should read, “The boss took fucking Ford Fiestas and intended to force their sale on all his employees at a cost exceeding a red Ferrari. Bill, along with a large percentage of fellow employees, didn’t like it.

Here’s are more facts, the US health care is factually lower in quality and more expensive to Morocco, Chile or Cyprus, Norway, Portugal, Monaco and Greece on an average price of more than 1500%

The quality of US healthcare is ranked 37th in the world. Most Americans can’t be bothered with the pesky annoyances facts bring, anymore, but Google it. And, stop polluting the world with hyperbole and proselytization of Obamcare.

Accordingly, this post should read, “The boss took fucking Ford Fiestas and intended to force their sale on all his employees at a cost exceeding a red Ferrari. Bill, along with a large percentage of fellow employees, didn’t like it.

Here’s are more facts, the US health care is factually lower in quality and more expensive to Morocco, Chile or Cyprus, Norway, Portugal, Monaco and Greece on an average price of more than 1500%

Wouldn’t changing the system to not allow lawsuits except in extreme cases (removing the wrong leg, misdiagnosing terminal illnesses, etc.) bring down healthcare, not to mention legal costs? Isn’t one of the main reasons for high healthcare costs the astronomical costs doctors have to pay for malpractice insurance? Read up on New Zealand’s socialized medical system, which severely limits lawsuits. It works, people.

Wouldn’t changing the system to not allow lawsuits except in extreme cases (removing the wrong leg, misdiagnosing terminal illnesses, etc.) bring down healthcare, not to mention legal costs? Isn’t one of the main reasons for high healthcare costs the astronomical costs doctors have to pay for malpractice insurance? Read up on New Zealand’s socialized medical system, which severely limits lawsuits. It works, people.

Wouldn’t changing the system to not allow lawsuits except in extreme cases (removing the wrong leg, misdiagnosing terminal illnesses, etc.) bring down healthcare, not to mention legal costs? Isn’t one of the main reasons for high healthcare costs the astronomical costs doctors have to pay for malpractice insurance? Read up on New Zealand’s socialized medical system, which severely limits lawsuits. It works, people.

Now let’s say that the sodas were advertised at $1.25 each but some had to pay $4.50 before the machine would drop a soda, while others ended up paying $8.00 each. Then they found out that the $1.25 sodas were only half-full of carbonated water. Then to top it off, poor Bill, who didn’t buy any soda because he knew it was bad for him (and we all know that soda REALLY is bad for you), had money removed from his paycheck to help pay for the electricity that the soda machine needed to keep the lights running at night. So who is the real jackass? Bill for not wanting the soda machine, because he knew it was bad for everybody? Or his coworkers for demanding the unhealthy soda machine even though nobody was able to really get what they wanted at the pricepoint they were promised while also causing everybody’s pay to be reduced in order for the machines upkeep?

Now let’s say that the sodas were advertised at $1.25 each but some had to pay $4.50 before the machine would drop a soda, while others ended up paying $8.00 each. Then they found out that the $1.25 sodas were only half-full of carbonated water. Then to top it off, poor Bill, who didn’t buy any soda because he knew it was bad for him (and we all know that soda REALLY is bad for you), had money removed from his paycheck to help pay for the electricity that the soda machine needed to keep the lights running at night. So who is the real jackass? Bill for not wanting the soda machine, because he knew it was bad for everybody? Or his coworkers for demanding the unhealthy soda machine even though nobody was able to really get what they wanted at the pricepoint they were promised while also causing everybody’s pay to be reduced in order for the machines upkeep?

Now let’s say that the sodas were advertised at $1.25 each but some had to pay $4.50 before the machine would drop a soda, while others ended up paying $8.00 each. Then they found out that the $1.25 sodas were only half-full of carbonated water. Then to top it off, poor Bill, who didn’t buy any soda because he knew it was bad for him (and we all know that soda REALLY is bad for you), had money removed from his paycheck to help pay for the electricity that the soda machine needed to keep the lights running at night. So who is the real jackass? Bill for not wanting the soda machine, because he knew it was bad for everybody? Or his coworkers for demanding the unhealthy soda machine even though nobody was able to really get what they wanted at the pricepoint they were promised while also causing everybody’s pay to be reduced in order for the machines upkeep?

So, wait, we’re not reeeeeeeally talking about a soda machine here are we? Just a hunch. Nothing gets by me. Oh, “Diet Fresca” is not invalid because “it doesn’t exist.” It is invalid because the misnomer is redundant. Sorry, just sticking to what REALLY matters here.

So, wait, we’re not reeeeeeeally talking about a soda machine here are we? Just a hunch. Nothing gets by me. Oh, “Diet Fresca” is not invalid because “it doesn’t exist.” It is invalid because the misnomer is redundant. Sorry, just sticking to what REALLY matters here.

So, wait, we’re not reeeeeeeally talking about a soda machine here are we? Just a hunch. Nothing gets by me. Oh, “Diet Fresca” is not invalid because “it doesn’t exist.” It is invalid because the misnomer is redundant. Sorry, just sticking to what REALLY matters here.

Maybe a better example would be a water fountain- something that we all know we need. Some think its just fine to charge $2/bottle, even though its just tap water, bottled with a cute label. The people know its just that, but, what the heck, most of us can pay $2 so who cares? Who cares that there are some who would just like to take a drink of water at a fair price.

Oddly, the initial folk who promoted the ‘water fountain’ ~20 years ago are now the ones who are against it. I wonder why that is.

Maybe a better example would be a water fountain- something that we all know we need. Some think its just fine to charge $2/bottle, even though its just tap water, bottled with a cute label. The people know its just that, but, what the heck, most of us can pay $2 so who cares? Who cares that there are some who would just like to take a drink of water at a fair price.

Oddly, the initial folk who promoted the ‘water fountain’ ~20 years ago are now the ones who are against it. I wonder why that is.

We currently enjoy the worst healthcare in the developed world and the most expensive healthcare in the developed world. It’s driving us to bankruptcy as a nation and we have to stop it. Bill is making big money off of the current disaster so he demands that we keep the current system. He knows that he’s not going to live forever and figures he’ll be dead by the time our grandkids are ruined by the current healthcare system so “what the hell?” That’s not his problem. Bill is a fucking jackass.

We currently enjoy the worst healthcare in the developed world and the most expensive healthcare in the developed world. It’s driving us to bankruptcy as a nation and we have to stop it. Bill is making big money off of the current disaster so he demands that we keep the current system. He knows that he’s not going to live forever and figures he’ll be dead by the time our grandkids are ruined by the current healthcare system so “what the hell?” That’s not his problem. Bill is a fucking jackass.

We currently enjoy the worst healthcare in the developed world and the most expensive healthcare in the developed world. It’s driving us to bankruptcy as a nation and we have to stop it. Bill is making big money off of the current disaster so he demands that we keep the current system. He knows that he’s not going to live forever and figures he’ll be dead by the time our grandkids are ruined by the current healthcare system so “what the hell?” That’s not his problem. Bill is a fucking jackass.

It cracks me up how many people believe no one has a choice regarding ACA. There are choices. You take what your employer offers, you get health care, or you don’t are a few. Punishment for not having health insurance is not jail time, it’s a death sentence. The absence of choice exists mainly in Congress, where the majority chooses to ignore decency and common sense and believe that like taxes, they can cheat death.

It cracks me up how many people believe no one has a choice regarding ACA. There are choices. You take what your employer offers, you get health care, or you don’t are a few. Punishment for not having health insurance is not jail time, it’s a death sentence. The absence of choice exists mainly in Congress, where the majority chooses to ignore decency and common sense and believe that like taxes, they can cheat death.

It cracks me up how many people believe no one has a choice regarding ACA. There are choices. You take what your employer offers, you get health care, or you don’t are a few. Punishment for not having health insurance is not jail time, it’s a death sentence. The absence of choice exists mainly in Congress, where the majority chooses to ignore decency and common sense and believe that like taxes, they can cheat death.

I’m for the Affordable Care Act and don’t really give a fuck about soda machines but I think it’s worth mentioning that a soda machine would (theoretically) make money for the company while the Affordable Care Act actually costs it’s citizens something. It’s a decent but not perfect analogy.

I’m for the Affordable Care Act and don’t really give a fuck about soda machines but I think it’s worth mentioning that a soda machine would (theoretically) make money for the company while the Affordable Care Act actually costs it’s citizens something. It’s a decent but not perfect analogy.

I’m for the Affordable Care Act and don’t really give a fuck about soda machines but I think it’s worth mentioning that a soda machine would (theoretically) make money for the company while the Affordable Care Act actually costs it’s citizens something. It’s a decent but not perfect analogy.

I wrote a poem based off of this. Thanks for the inspiration. It is always a pleasure to be inspired so much to write something so quickly. Thank you. I can’t thank you enough. If you or anyone would like to read it. Here it is. http://spokenfunk.com/andy-sticks-by-poetri-neighborhood-shut-down/ I am working on the video and the souncloud recording rght now. Thanks again.

I wrote a poem based off of this. Thanks for the inspiration. It is always a pleasure to be inspired so much to write something so quickly. Thank you. I can’t thank you enough. If you or anyone would like to read it. Here it is. http://spokenfunk.com/andy-sticks-by-poetri-neighborhood-shut-down/ I am working on the video and the souncloud recording rght now. Thanks again.

Thanks CeeDub. Great analogy. Pity it’s lost on most of the commenters. I live in Australia where none of this is an issue. Is it perfect? No. But everyone gets the care they need without fear of bankruptcy or denial.

Thanks CeeDub. Great analogy. Pity it’s lost on most of the commenters. I live in Australia where none of this is an issue. Is it perfect? No. But everyone gets the care they need without fear of bankruptcy or denial.

Thanks CeeDub. Great analogy. Pity it’s lost on most of the commenters. I live in Australia where none of this is an issue. Is it perfect? No. But everyone gets the care they need without fear of bankruptcy or denial.

You folks are talking soda machines when you should be looking at who does not have or need health insurance. YOU YOUNG FOLKS. who will get the money? Does it matter, cause it won’t be you. You your head. You should be apposing the wasteful piece of crud.

You folks are talking soda machines when you should be looking at who does not have or need health insurance. YOU YOUNG FOLKS. who will get the money? Does it matter, cause it won’t be you. You your head. You should be apposing the wasteful piece of crud.

You folks are talking soda machines when you should be looking at who does not have or need health insurance. YOU YOUNG FOLKS. who will get the money? Does it matter, cause it won’t be you. You your head. You should be apposing the wasteful piece of crud.

After reading the comments, I agree that the only part that was missed was the participation aspect. So let’s make it a coffee machine, and make it mandatory to contribute a dollar a month to coffee machine upkeep, but if you contribute you can have all the coffee, tea, and cocoa you want. Bill is still a jerk.

After reading the comments, I agree that the only part that was missed was the participation aspect. So let’s make it a coffee machine, and make it mandatory to contribute a dollar a month to coffee machine upkeep, but if you contribute you can have all the coffee, tea, and cocoa you want. Bill is still a jerk.

After reading the comments, I agree that the only part that was missed was the participation aspect. So let’s make it a coffee machine, and make it mandatory to contribute a dollar a month to coffee machine upkeep, but if you contribute you can have all the coffee, tea, and cocoa you want. Bill is still a jerk.

REALITY NOW IS – majority of Americans are against Obama*care*. Every poll, even polls from the liberal main stream media Obama “yes” people indicates that by a wide margin, Americans are against Obama*care*.

REALITY NOW IS – majority of Americans are against Obama*care*. Every poll, even polls from the liberal main stream media Obama “yes” people indicates that by a wide margin, Americans are against Obama*care*.

REALITY NOW IS – majority of Americans are against Obama*care*. Every poll, even polls from the liberal main stream media Obama “yes” people indicates that by a wide margin, Americans are against Obama*care*.

I agree and Christopher’s Allegory he is forgetting to mention a lot of things which i wont waste time on because everyone can go look up the facts but also that bill will keep getting paid till all of this resolves and nobody else will.

I agree and Christopher’s Allegory he is forgetting to mention a lot of things which i wont waste time on because everyone can go look up the facts but also that bill will keep getting paid till all of this resolves and nobody else will.

I agree and Christopher’s Allegory he is forgetting to mention a lot of things which i wont waste time on because everyone can go look up the facts but also that bill will keep getting paid till all of this resolves and nobody else will.

Before they got the soda machine, no one knew that every night the pesky custodial staff would “steal” the sodas from the little shop in the lobby downstairs. This forced the shop owner to raise the price of each soda to many times its actual value just to offset the costs and keep his shop open. So whenever Bill or whoever decided they wanted a soda, they would have to absorb the cost of all the free sodas given to the custodial staff. This means that the day Bill needs a soda because he is severely dehydrated, he would have to spend an arm and a leg for that bubbly refreshment. One day Bill is parched but forgot his wallet at home so he could not afford the soda and he passes out from the extreme thirst.

Having seen this happen many times over, the great guys in the office wellness group decided to give everyone the opportunity to stay well hydrated and avoid the ill-effects of extreme thirst. They put in a soda machine and took a small amount from everyone’s paycheck every month (custodial staff all the way up to CEO). The office wellness group then called Coca Cola and Pepsi and worked out a wholesale rate for keeping their soda machine stocked. Now anyone can grab a soda whenever they want because they cost so little per can. Bill being the wise-guy that he is, knows that sodas are bad for you so he only drinks water. Whenever the special occasion comes along that he wants to indulge in a bit of bubbly refreshment, Bill is able to enjoy a soda at no immediate cost.

However, Bill does not realize that true cost for each of his once-in-a-while sodas is cheaper than it would have ever been before. He knows he normally only drinks 3 sodas a month but all he sees is the $10 deducted from his paycheck every month regardless if he drinks any at all. He gets mad and wants to get the machine removed because he imagines that his coworkers are mooching off him. In his fit of rage he forgets that before the soda machine arrived each soda cost $5 and he is actually saving money on the sodas that he normally drinks each month. He mistakens the wellness group’s initiative as a corporate pro-soda campaign sponsored by the people at Coca Cola and Pepsi to boost sales. Instead the reality is that the wellness group has carefully monitored people’s soda drinking habits and saw that almost everybody in the office drinks soda every now and then. The saw where they can save everyone some money. They verified their ideas with management and worked out deals with the soda companies.

Bill is not only a jackass, he is also obstinately short-sighted. He cannot and refuses to see that he is saving money. He ignores reports from his coworkers saying that they are all spending less on their soda consumption. He ignores his friends stories when they say that they have similar soda machine program at their office and its working well. He ignores his best friend Mitt in accounting when he tells him that people at his old job had a similar system. He fails to realize that if he instead campaigns to replace some of the salty snacks in the lunch room with some fruits, then people will be less thirsty and thereby be less inclined to drink soda. This would lower the soda demand and therefore lower the amount everyone pays per month, including himself.

Bill is not only a jackass, he is a fucking jackass. He doesn’t believe everyone deserves a soda when they need it. Bill thinks that if anyone can have a soda when they need one, then its not special anymore when he has one. Hell, why did he even bother going to college and getting this great paying job, if anyone can afford the luxury of a soda.

I hope some of you guys appreciate these analogies that I am trying to draw. From someone currently in medical school, i can tell you there is overwhelming support from physicians because there are so many people that cannot pay for healthcare. Those unmet costs are not absorbed by the hospital, insurance companies or the government. They are tacked onto the bills whenever you and I go to the hospital and our high insurance premiums cover the costs. Have you ever wondered why a C-section costs $5000 in Canada but $8000 in the USA?

Before they got the soda machine, no one knew that every night the pesky custodial staff would “steal” the sodas from the little shop in the lobby downstairs. This forced the shop owner to raise the price of each soda to many times its actual value just to offset the costs and keep his shop open. So whenever Bill or whoever decided they wanted a soda, they would have to absorb the cost of all the free sodas given to the custodial staff. This means that the day Bill needs a soda because he is severely dehydrated, he would have to spend an arm and a leg for that bubbly refreshment. One day Bill is parched but forgot his wallet at home so he could not afford the soda and he passes out from the extreme thirst.

Having seen this happen many times over, the great guys in the office wellness group decided to give everyone the opportunity to stay well hydrated and avoid the ill-effects of extreme thirst. They put in a soda machine and took a small amount from everyone’s paycheck every month (custodial staff all the way up to CEO). The office wellness group then called Coca Cola and Pepsi and worked out a wholesale rate for keeping their soda machine stocked. Now anyone can grab a soda whenever they want because they cost so little per can. Bill being the wise-guy that he is, knows that sodas are bad for you so he only drinks water. Whenever the special occasion comes along that he wants to indulge in a bit of bubbly refreshment, Bill is able to enjoy a soda at no immediate cost.

However, Bill does not realize that true cost for each of his once-in-a-while sodas is cheaper than it would have ever been before. He knows he normally only drinks 3 sodas a month but all he sees is the $10 deducted from his paycheck every month regardless if he drinks any at all. He gets mad and wants to get the machine removed because he imagines that his coworkers are mooching off him. In his fit of rage he forgets that before the soda machine arrived each soda cost $5 and he is actually saving money on the sodas that he normally drinks each month. He mistakens the wellness group’s initiative as a corporate pro-soda campaign sponsored by the people at Coca Cola and Pepsi to boost sales. Instead the reality is that the wellness group has carefully monitored people’s soda drinking habits and saw that almost everybody in the office drinks soda every now and then. The saw where they can save everyone some money. They verified their ideas with management and worked out deals with the soda companies.

Bill is not only a jackass, he is also obstinately short-sighted. He cannot and refuses to see that he is saving money. He ignores reports from his coworkers saying that they are all spending less on their soda consumption. He ignores his friends stories when they say that they have similar soda machine program at their office and its working well. He ignores his best friend Mitt in accounting when he tells him that people at his old job had a similar system. He fails to realize that if he instead campaigns to replace some of the salty snacks in the lunch room with some fruits, then people will be less thirsty and thereby be less inclined to drink soda. This would lower the soda demand and therefore lower the amount everyone pays per month, including himself.

Bill is not only a jackass, he is a fucking jackass. He doesn’t believe everyone deserves a soda when they need it. Bill thinks that if anyone can have a soda when they need one, then its not special anymore when he has one. Hell, why did he even bother going to college and getting this great paying job, if anyone can afford the luxury of a soda.

I hope some of you guys appreciate these analogies that I am trying to draw. From someone currently in medical school, i can tell you there is overwhelming support from physicians because there are so many people that cannot pay for healthcare. Those unmet costs are not absorbed by the hospital, insurance companies or the government. They are tacked onto the bills whenever you and I go to the hospital and our high insurance premiums cover the costs. Have you ever wondered why a C-section costs $5000 in Canada but $8000 in the USA?

Before they got the soda machine, no one knew that every night the pesky custodial staff would “steal” the sodas from the little shop in the lobby downstairs. This forced the shop owner to raise the price of each soda to many times its actual value just to offset the costs and keep his shop open. So whenever Bill or whoever decided they wanted a soda, they would have to absorb the cost of all the free sodas given to the custodial staff. This means that the day Bill needs a soda because he is severely dehydrated, he would have to spend an arm and a leg for that bubbly refreshment. One day Bill is parched but forgot his wallet at home so he could not afford the soda and he passes out from the extreme thirst.

Having seen this happen many times over, the great guys in the office wellness group decided to give everyone the opportunity to stay well hydrated and avoid the ill-effects of extreme thirst. They put in a soda machine and took a small amount from everyone’s paycheck every month (custodial staff all the way up to CEO). The office wellness group then called Coca Cola and Pepsi and worked out a wholesale rate for keeping their soda machine stocked. Now anyone can grab a soda whenever they want because they cost so little per can. Bill being the wise-guy that he is, knows that sodas are bad for you so he only drinks water. Whenever the special occasion comes along that he wants to indulge in a bit of bubbly refreshment, Bill is able to enjoy a soda at no immediate cost.

However, Bill does not realize that true cost for each of his once-in-a-while sodas is cheaper than it would have ever been before. He knows he normally only drinks 3 sodas a month but all he sees is the $10 deducted from his paycheck every month regardless if he drinks any at all. He gets mad and wants to get the machine removed because he imagines that his coworkers are mooching off him. In his fit of rage he forgets that before the soda machine arrived each soda cost $5 and he is actually saving money on the sodas that he normally drinks each month. He mistakens the wellness group’s initiative as a corporate pro-soda campaign sponsored by the people at Coca Cola and Pepsi to boost sales. Instead the reality is that the wellness group has carefully monitored people’s soda drinking habits and saw that almost everybody in the office drinks soda every now and then. The saw where they can save everyone some money. They verified their ideas with management and worked out deals with the soda companies.

Bill is not only a jackass, he is also obstinately short-sighted. He cannot and refuses to see that he is saving money. He ignores reports from his coworkers saying that they are all spending less on their soda consumption. He ignores his friends stories when they say that they have similar soda machine program at their office and its working well. He ignores his best friend Mitt in accounting when he tells him that people at his old job had a similar system. He fails to realize that if he instead campaigns to replace some of the salty snacks in the lunch room with some fruits, then people will be less thirsty and thereby be less inclined to drink soda. This would lower the soda demand and therefore lower the amount everyone pays per month, including himself.

Bill is not only a jackass, he is a fucking jackass. He doesn’t believe everyone deserves a soda when they need it. Bill thinks that if anyone can have a soda when they need one, then its not special anymore when he has one. Hell, why did he even bother going to college and getting this great paying job, if anyone can afford the luxury of a soda.

I hope some of you guys appreciate these analogies that I am trying to draw. From someone currently in medical school, i can tell you there is overwhelming support from physicians because there are so many people that cannot pay for healthcare. Those unmet costs are not absorbed by the hospital, insurance companies or the government. They are tacked onto the bills whenever you and I go to the hospital and our high insurance premiums cover the costs. Have you ever wondered why a C-section costs $5000 in Canada but $8000 in the USA?

So your company’s Chief Executive decides to hold a vote to decide whether or not to put a soda machine with really expensive and highly addictive soda in the break room. The Chief Executive really likes the idea of the soda machine and he tells everyone that a soda machine would be really good for the company. Since some employees are paid more than others, the well-paid employees will have a mandatory deduction taken out of their paycheck to subsidize the cost of soda for employees who are paid less as well as for thousands of individuals who do no work for the company, but loiter outside the building and watch other people work. The Chief Executive thinks this is great, because many employees and those who don’t work for the company have never before had soda.

The deduction will be taken from well-paid employees whether the well-paid employee drinks soda or not. In fact, many well-paid employees prefer coffee, tea, juice, and water and think expensive, addictive soda is a poor and unhealthy beverage option. In fact, well-paid many employees are morally and ethically opposed to soda and believe the whole idea is poorly conceived. Further, they conclude (despite management’s assertions that this will NEVER happen) the new soda machine will force all other beverage options out of the company (or make them cost prohibitive) – no more coffee, tea, juice or water – just company supplied soda. PLUS, many of the well-paid employees will be forced to take a pay cut and be forced into the low-pay group following cost cutting measures that are necessary in order to pay for the cost of the new soda machine.

While most employees in the company like the idea of finding a way to let the non-employees and lower-paid employees have some soda, they are opposed to management dictating the distribution of soda in this fashion – especially at the cost of their preferred beverages of coffee, tea, juice and water. Despite passionately expressed concerns over the new soda machine, a company-wide vote is held and a few well-paid employees, most of the lower-paid employees and all of the non-employees loitering outside (who are also allowed to vote) vote to receive free or subsidized soda for themselves at the expense of the well-paid employees. The vote is 54-46, with the lower-paid employees and non-employees winning the day.

Now John, who is the comptroller for the company, is among those well-paid employees who was opposed to the new soda machine and who has made repeated appeals, along with 46% of all the employees in the company, to the Chief Executive about the infeasibility, expense and unfairness of the soda machine plan. The Chief Executive scoffs at John and the 46% and claims a vote was held and they lost fair and square. They are mandated to provide free or subsidized soda to all lower-paid employees and non-employees at their expense, and will be forced to drink soda themselves (even though they hate soda) because all coffee, tea, juice and water vendors will quit offering their products to the company.

Now John and the 46% are furious over this asinine plan and demand that the Chief Executive sit down with them to discuss a better plan to take care of those who wish to have soda without screwing over everyone else who hates soda or who is happy with their existing cup of joe. The Chief Executive calls them a bunch of whining babies and tells them to suck it up – which only fuels their outrage. So, in an effort to force the Chief Executive to listen to reason and to discuss alternatives to the soda machine plan, John refuses to issue any checks to cover company bills for non-essential services (roughly 15% of company operations). Unfortunately, the Chief Executive is unyielding and John is unable to prevent delivery of the soda machine.

So, the new, grotesquely expensive soda machine arrives and is installed in the break room. However, none of the buttons work on the machine and nobody can extract any soda from it. The Chief Executive hangs a sign on the soda machine saying he is working out the kinks. He further notes that the fact that people came to push the buttons is a great indicator that people really want soda. John and the 46% are still furious because the Chief Executive is refusing to listen to them and their pleas to discuss alternatives to the soda machine, which now appears to be outright defective and incapable of delivering the promised soda.

The Chief Executive and all the low-paid employees and non-employees express their outrage at John and the 46% because they won’t sit still and accept the fact that they all voted that the well-paid employees should pay for soda machine despite the well-paid employee’s attempts to stop them.

Realizing that they are dealing with an irrational shitbag who is incapable of reason or logic, John and the 46% now state that, in addition to refusing to pay for the 15% of non-essential company operations, they will not allow the Chief Executive to incur any more debt (which has exploded to an astronomical $17 TRILLION under his rule) unless he sits down to discuss the negative impact of the ridiculous soda machine and to arrive a more equitable and reasonable solution. The Chief Executive just laughs…

What should John and the 46% do?

Impeach the Chief Executive. The Chief Executive is bat-shit crazy and has no clue what he is doing.

So your company’s Chief Executive decides to hold a vote to decide whether or not to put a soda machine with really expensive and highly addictive soda in the break room. The Chief Executive really likes the idea of the soda machine and he tells everyone that a soda machine would be really good for the company. Since some employees are paid more than others, the well-paid employees will have a mandatory deduction taken out of their paycheck to subsidize the cost of soda for employees who are paid less as well as for thousands of individuals who do no work for the company, but loiter outside the building and watch other people work. The Chief Executive thinks this is great, because many employees and those who don’t work for the company have never before had soda.

The deduction will be taken from well-paid employees whether the well-paid employee drinks soda or not. In fact, many well-paid employees prefer coffee, tea, juice, and water and think expensive, addictive soda is a poor and unhealthy beverage option. In fact, well-paid many employees are morally and ethically opposed to soda and believe the whole idea is poorly conceived. Further, they conclude (despite management’s assertions that this will NEVER happen) the new soda machine will force all other beverage options out of the company (or make them cost prohibitive) – no more coffee, tea, juice or water – just company supplied soda. PLUS, many of the well-paid employees will be forced to take a pay cut and be forced into the low-pay group following cost cutting measures that are necessary in order to pay for the cost of the new soda machine.

While most employees in the company like the idea of finding a way to let the non-employees and lower-paid employees have some soda, they are opposed to management dictating the distribution of soda in this fashion – especially at the cost of their preferred beverages of coffee, tea, juice and water. Despite passionately expressed concerns over the new soda machine, a company-wide vote is held and a few well-paid employees, most of the lower-paid employees and all of the non-employees loitering outside (who are also allowed to vote) vote to receive free or subsidized soda for themselves at the expense of the well-paid employees. The vote is 54-46, with the lower-paid employees and non-employees winning the day.

Now John, who is the comptroller for the company, is among those well-paid employees who was opposed to the new soda machine and who has made repeated appeals, along with 46% of all the employees in the company, to the Chief Executive about the infeasibility, expense and unfairness of the soda machine plan. The Chief Executive scoffs at John and the 46% and claims a vote was held and they lost fair and square. They are mandated to provide free or subsidized soda to all lower-paid employees and non-employees at their expense, and will be forced to drink soda themselves (even though they hate soda) because all coffee, tea, juice and water vendors will quit offering their products to the company.

Now John and the 46% are furious over this asinine plan and demand that the Chief Executive sit down with them to discuss a better plan to take care of those who wish to have soda without screwing over everyone else who hates soda or who is happy with their existing cup of joe. The Chief Executive calls them a bunch of whining babies and tells them to suck it up – which only fuels their outrage. So, in an effort to force the Chief Executive to listen to reason and to discuss alternatives to the soda machine plan, John refuses to issue any checks to cover company bills for non-essential services (roughly 15% of company operations). Unfortunately, the Chief Executive is unyielding and John is unable to prevent delivery of the soda machine.

So, the new, grotesquely expensive soda machine arrives and is installed in the break room. However, none of the buttons work on the machine and nobody can extract any soda from it. The Chief Executive hangs a sign on the soda machine saying he is working out the kinks. He further notes that the fact that people came to push the buttons is a great indicator that people really want soda. John and the 46% are still furious because the Chief Executive is refusing to listen to them and their pleas to discuss alternatives to the soda machine, which now appears to be outright defective and incapable of delivering the promised soda.

The Chief Executive and all the low-paid employees and non-employees express their outrage at John and the 46% because they won’t sit still and accept the fact that they all voted that the well-paid employees should pay for soda machine despite the well-paid employee’s attempts to stop them.

Realizing that they are dealing with an irrational shitbag who is incapable of reason or logic, John and the 46% now state that, in addition to refusing to pay for the 15% of non-essential company operations, they will not allow the Chief Executive to incur any more debt (which has exploded to an astronomical $17 TRILLION under his rule) unless he sits down to discuss the negative impact of the ridiculous soda machine and to arrive a more equitable and reasonable solution. The Chief Executive just laughs…

What should John and the 46% do?

Impeach the Chief Executive. The Chief Executive is bat-shit crazy and has no clue what he is doing.

So your company’s Chief Executive decides to hold a vote to decide whether or not to put a soda machine with really expensive and highly addictive soda in the break room. The Chief Executive really likes the idea of the soda machine and he tells everyone that a soda machine would be really good for the company. Since some employees are paid more than others, the well-paid employees will have a mandatory deduction taken out of their paycheck to subsidize the cost of soda for employees who are paid less as well as for thousands of individuals who do no work for the company, but loiter outside the building and watch other people work. The Chief Executive thinks this is great, because many employees and those who don’t work for the company have never before had soda.

The deduction will be taken from well-paid employees whether the well-paid employee drinks soda or not. In fact, many well-paid employees prefer coffee, tea, juice, and water and think expensive, addictive soda is a poor and unhealthy beverage option. In fact, well-paid many employees are morally and ethically opposed to soda and believe the whole idea is poorly conceived. Further, they conclude (despite management’s assertions that this will NEVER happen) the new soda machine will force all other beverage options out of the company (or make them cost prohibitive) – no more coffee, tea, juice or water – just company supplied soda. PLUS, many of the well-paid employees will be forced to take a pay cut and be forced into the low-pay group following cost cutting measures that are necessary in order to pay for the cost of the new soda machine.

While most employees in the company like the idea of finding a way to let the non-employees and lower-paid employees have some soda, they are opposed to management dictating the distribution of soda in this fashion – especially at the cost of their preferred beverages of coffee, tea, juice and water. Despite passionately expressed concerns over the new soda machine, a company-wide vote is held and a few well-paid employees, most of the lower-paid employees and all of the non-employees loitering outside (who are also allowed to vote) vote to receive free or subsidized soda for themselves at the expense of the well-paid employees. The vote is 54-46, with the lower-paid employees and non-employees winning the day.

Now John, who is the comptroller for the company, is among those well-paid employees who was opposed to the new soda machine and who has made repeated appeals, along with 46% of all the employees in the company, to the Chief Executive about the infeasibility, expense and unfairness of the soda machine plan. The Chief Executive scoffs at John and the 46% and claims a vote was held and they lost fair and square. They are mandated to provide free or subsidized soda to all lower-paid employees and non-employees at their expense, and will be forced to drink soda themselves (even though they hate soda) because all coffee, tea, juice and water vendors will quit offering their products to the company.

Now John and the 46% are furious over this asinine plan and demand that the Chief Executive sit down with them to discuss a better plan to take care of those who wish to have soda without screwing over everyone else who hates soda or who is happy with their existing cup of joe. The Chief Executive calls them a bunch of whining babies and tells them to suck it up – which only fuels their outrage. So, in an effort to force the Chief Executive to listen to reason and to discuss alternatives to the soda machine plan, John refuses to issue any checks to cover company bills for non-essential services (roughly 15% of company operations). Unfortunately, the Chief Executive is unyielding and John is unable to prevent delivery of the soda machine.

So, the new, grotesquely expensive soda machine arrives and is installed in the break room. However, none of the buttons work on the machine and nobody can extract any soda from it. The Chief Executive hangs a sign on the soda machine saying he is working out the kinks. He further notes that the fact that people came to push the buttons is a great indicator that people really want soda. John and the 46% are still furious because the Chief Executive is refusing to listen to them and their pleas to discuss alternatives to the soda machine, which now appears to be outright defective and incapable of delivering the promised soda.

The Chief Executive and all the low-paid employees and non-employees express their outrage at John and the 46% because they won’t sit still and accept the fact that they all voted that the well-paid employees should pay for soda machine despite the well-paid employee’s attempts to stop them.

Realizing that they are dealing with an irrational shitbag who is incapable of reason or logic, John and the 46% now state that, in addition to refusing to pay for the 15% of non-essential company operations, they will not allow the Chief Executive to incur any more debt (which has exploded to an astronomical $17 TRILLION under his rule) unless he sits down to discuss the negative impact of the ridiculous soda machine and to arrive a more equitable and reasonable solution. The Chief Executive just laughs…

What should John and the 46% do?

Impeach the Chief Executive. The Chief Executive is bat-shit crazy and has no clue what he is doing.

So, imagine that the company you work for held a poll and asked everyone if they thought it would be a good idea to put a soda machine in the break room. The CEO promised that all deliberations and proposals would be recorded and streamed from the company’s website. Unfortunately, none of the deliberations or proposals were available to the employees as promise.

Instead, the most enormously complex and impossible to successfully implement proposal was created in secrecy. None of the managers, nor the CEO actually read the 13,000-page proposal. The employees were asked and the proposal did not have majority approval by the employees either.

Instead of deliberations streamed to the employees like the CEO promised, the managers argued and fought in secret for months. During this time, one of the managers in the Business Unit, beloved Ted Kennedy, manager of the Massacusettes division, passed away. The Mass. employees hired a new manager, who was vocally opposed to putting in a new soda machine.

So, instead of the pro-machine and the anti-machine managers working together and coming to a compromise solution, the pro-machine managers scheduled an emergency meeting to vote on whether they should put in the soda machine while they had a majority – before the new Mass. manager had his first day at the office.

Since there were several managers that typically sided with the pro-machine group that were not happy with the proposal, the pro-machine managers bribed them. Manager of the Nebraska division, Ben Nelson, was promised that the rest of the company would pay millions to the Nebraska division, which was dubbed the Cornhusker Kickback around the company water cooler. Manager of Louisiana division, Mary Landrieu, was bribed with $100M in subsidies for her group, which was dubbed the Louisianna Purchase around the water cooler. The Manager from Connecticut, Chris Dodd, was bribed with a $100M item to fund a university hospital for his department. The manager from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, received $10 BILLION to build new health centers for his department. The other Connecticut manager, Joe Lieberman, was threatened with being removed as committee chairman if he falls out of line.

So the emergency vote was called and the proper managers were bribed and threatened, still not having read the proposal. The vote passed by the narrowest of margins in the dead of night. After the corruption was made public, the finance department, holders of the company’s purse strings, had several re-votes to cancel the soda machine contract, all of which passed, though the Business Unit managers blocked attempts at cancellation.

A majority of the employees still dislike the soda machine. After being told that soda prices would decrease substantially, soda prices have risen at a faster rate than before the machine was installed. The employees have had to pay higher prices for things like bottle openers (due to tax hikes on soda pop devices) for 3 years and STILL the machines have not yet even been fully or properly installed. Many employees are even having their hours cut due to the costs associated with running the machine.

It’s payroll time and the financial managers, seeing that the soda pop machine is costing the company significantly more than it was promised to cost (a determination that the company’s budget office made as well), realize that keeping the machine around will be financially unsustainable and the quality of the pop reduced. They have been campaigning to take out the machine and replace it with another, more sustainable, workable and effective soda pop distribution mechanism, like being able to buy soda pop across state lines, for example, but the business unit managers refuse to speak to the finance managers.

The financial managers decide that, until ALL of the managers can negotiate regarding the financially unsustainable soda machine, they would not proceed with appropriations for non-critical business functions, which affects only about 17% of the company. The CEO, being petty and vidictive, decides to close all of the company’s playgrounds, even those that are not company owned, just so he could make it more painful for employees while trying to blame the financial managers for the disruption. Just to rub salt into the wound, he even goes out of his way to spend money to fence off open-air playgrounds that are open to employees even when staff is not on duty.

While the standoff continues, though, the CEO continues to play on company-owned golf courses which he keeps open for his use.

So what should we do?
Answer: We should fire the corrupt business unit managers that bulldozed the proposal through, against the will of the employees. We should remove the pop machine that has done too much damange financially already and replace it with a new proposal for a soda pop distribution method that all sides can agree on (that will actually work!).

Lastly, We should also fire the CEO, who is supposed to be a leader and not a petty, vidictive child, who tries to blame everything on his enemies (much like he did for the first half of his career when he blamed the company’s state on the previous CEO, forgetting that ALL of the management groups were opposed to that CEO for the two years prior to his retirement and, during which time the company started its decline).

So, imagine that the company you work for held a poll and asked everyone if they thought it would be a good idea to put a soda machine in the break room. The CEO promised that all deliberations and proposals would be recorded and streamed from the company’s website. Unfortunately, none of the deliberations or proposals were available to the employees as promise.

Instead, the most enormously complex and impossible to successfully implement proposal was created in secrecy. None of the managers, nor the CEO actually read the 13,000-page proposal. The employees were asked and the proposal did not have majority approval by the employees either.

Instead of deliberations streamed to the employees like the CEO promised, the managers argued and fought in secret for months. During this time, one of the managers in the Business Unit, beloved Ted Kennedy, manager of the Massacusettes division, passed away. The Mass. employees hired a new manager, who was vocally opposed to putting in a new soda machine.

So, instead of the pro-machine and the anti-machine managers working together and coming to a compromise solution, the pro-machine managers scheduled an emergency meeting to vote on whether they should put in the soda machine while they had a majority – before the new Mass. manager had his first day at the office.

Since there were several managers that typically sided with the pro-machine group that were not happy with the proposal, the pro-machine managers bribed them. Manager of the Nebraska division, Ben Nelson, was promised that the rest of the company would pay millions to the Nebraska division, which was dubbed the Cornhusker Kickback around the company water cooler. Manager of Louisiana division, Mary Landrieu, was bribed with $100M in subsidies for her group, which was dubbed the Louisianna Purchase around the water cooler. The Manager from Connecticut, Chris Dodd, was bribed with a $100M item to fund a university hospital for his department. The manager from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, received $10 BILLION to build new health centers for his department. The other Connecticut manager, Joe Lieberman, was threatened with being removed as committee chairman if he falls out of line.

So the emergency vote was called and the proper managers were bribed and threatened, still not having read the proposal. The vote passed by the narrowest of margins in the dead of night. After the corruption was made public, the finance department, holders of the company’s purse strings, had several re-votes to cancel the soda machine contract, all of which passed, though the Business Unit managers blocked attempts at cancellation.

A majority of the employees still dislike the soda machine. After being told that soda prices would decrease substantially, soda prices have risen at a faster rate than before the machine was installed. The employees have had to pay higher prices for things like bottle openers (due to tax hikes on soda pop devices) for 3 years and STILL the machines have not yet even been fully or properly installed. Many employees are even having their hours cut due to the costs associated with running the machine.

It’s payroll time and the financial managers, seeing that the soda pop machine is costing the company significantly more than it was promised to cost (a determination that the company’s budget office made as well), realize that keeping the machine around will be financially unsustainable and the quality of the pop reduced. They have been campaigning to take out the machine and replace it with another, more sustainable, workable and effective soda pop distribution mechanism, like being able to buy soda pop across state lines, for example, but the business unit managers refuse to speak to the finance managers.

The financial managers decide that, until ALL of the managers can negotiate regarding the financially unsustainable soda machine, they would not proceed with appropriations for non-critical business functions, which affects only about 17% of the company. The CEO, being petty and vidictive, decides to close all of the company’s playgrounds, even those that are not company owned, just so he could make it more painful for employees while trying to blame the financial managers for the disruption. Just to rub salt into the wound, he even goes out of his way to spend money to fence off open-air playgrounds that are open to employees even when staff is not on duty.

While the standoff continues, though, the CEO continues to play on company-owned golf courses which he keeps open for his use.

So what should we do?
Answer: We should fire the corrupt business unit managers that bulldozed the proposal through, against the will of the employees. We should remove the pop machine that has done too much damange financially already and replace it with a new proposal for a soda pop distribution method that all sides can agree on (that will actually work!).

Lastly, We should also fire the CEO, who is supposed to be a leader and not a petty, vidictive child, who tries to blame everything on his enemies (much like he did for the first half of his career when he blamed the company’s state on the previous CEO, forgetting that ALL of the management groups were opposed to that CEO for the two years prior to his retirement and, during which time the company started its decline).

1) to pay for the soda machine, some of the employees must be let go
2) prior to voting yes on the soda machine, no one gets to know what will actually be in the machine. Therefore people will ONLY be allowed to vote on the concept of a soda machine rather than the contents of the soda machine
3) after the employees vote yes on the soda machine, the CEO went ahead and added a few items to the poll that made it seem as if these items were actually voted on by the employees, yet they were not
4) no one may purchase more than 3 items per week
5) the employees that did NOT want the soda machine, have to purchase a drink from it, or receive a reduction in pay. They can choose a purchase plan of making a purchase anywhere from once to three times a week.
6) management will decide what items are offered in the soda machine and the employees will have no say. the employees will, however, have to help pay for the drinks to stock the machine, which they will then pay for to receive from the machine. Management will then proceed to stock the machine with 1,000 different items.. most of which will hardly ever be consumed.
7) management will allow each department to have their own machine, but will still decide on the contents of each machine and require that purchases be made
8) management is exempt from the requirement of purchasing items from the soda machine every day
9) the CEO will choose his best friends within the company and exempt them from the requirement of purchasing the sodas
10) When Bill withheld pay, the CEO wrote to city hall and asked them to shut down whatever businesses they want, regardless if they operated with the company in question, to ensure that everyone felt the withheld pay more than they practically should have or would have.
11) the withheld pay only actually affects about 17% of the company, but the CEO and management will continue to manage by crisis to make their point.
12) even with all above notes becoming new knowledge AFTER the original passing of the vote, those who voted yes will refuse to allow those who voted no to engage them in legitimate debate as to the downsides of said vote.

1) to pay for the soda machine, some of the employees must be let go
2) prior to voting yes on the soda machine, no one gets to know what will actually be in the machine. Therefore people will ONLY be allowed to vote on the concept of a soda machine rather than the contents of the soda machine
3) after the employees vote yes on the soda machine, the CEO went ahead and added a few items to the poll that made it seem as if these items were actually voted on by the employees, yet they were not
4) no one may purchase more than 3 items per week
5) the employees that did NOT want the soda machine, have to purchase a drink from it, or receive a reduction in pay. They can choose a purchase plan of making a purchase anywhere from once to three times a week.
6) management will decide what items are offered in the soda machine and the employees will have no say. the employees will, however, have to help pay for the drinks to stock the machine, which they will then pay for to receive from the machine. Management will then proceed to stock the machine with 1,000 different items.. most of which will hardly ever be consumed.
7) management will allow each department to have their own machine, but will still decide on the contents of each machine and require that purchases be made
8) management is exempt from the requirement of purchasing items from the soda machine every day
9) the CEO will choose his best friends within the company and exempt them from the requirement of purchasing the sodas
10) When Bill withheld pay, the CEO wrote to city hall and asked them to shut down whatever businesses they want, regardless if they operated with the company in question, to ensure that everyone felt the withheld pay more than they practically should have or would have.
11) the withheld pay only actually affects about 17% of the company, but the CEO and management will continue to manage by crisis to make their point.
12) even with all above notes becoming new knowledge AFTER the original passing of the vote, those who voted yes will refuse to allow those who voted no to engage them in legitimate debate as to the downsides of said vote.

So, imagine that the company you work for held a poll and asked everyone if they thought it would be a good idea to put a soda machine in the break room. The CEO promised that all deliberations and proposals would be recorded and streamed from the company’s website. Unfortunately, none of the deliberations or proposals were available to the employees as promise.

Instead, the most enormously complex and impossible to successfully implement proposal was created in secrecy. None of the managers, nor the CEO actually read the 13,000-page proposal. The employees were asked and the proposal did not have majority approval by the employees either.

Instead of deliberations streamed to the employees like the CEO promised, the managers argued and fought in secret for months. During this time, one of the managers in the Business Unit, beloved Ted Kennedy, manager of the Massacusettes division, passed away. The Mass. employees hired a new manager, who was vocally opposed to putting in a new soda machine.

So, instead of the pro-machine and the anti-machine managers working together and coming to a compromise solution, the pro-machine managers scheduled an emergency meeting to vote on whether they should put in the soda machine while they had a majority – before the new Mass. manager had his first day at the office.

Since there were several managers that typically sided with the pro-machine group that were not happy with the proposal, the pro-machine managers bribed them. Manager of the Nebraska division, Ben Nelson, was promised that the rest of the company would pay millions to the Nebraska division, which was dubbed the Cornhusker Kickback around the company water cooler. Manager of Louisiana division, Mary Landrieu, was bribed with $100M in subsidies for her group, which was dubbed the Louisianna Purchase around the water cooler. The Manager from Connecticut, Chris Dodd, was bribed with a $100M item to fund a university hospital for his department. The manager from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, received $10 BILLION to build new health centers for his department. The other Connecticut manager, Joe Lieberman, was threatened with being removed as committee chairman if he falls out of line.

So the emergency vote was called and the proper managers were bribed and threatened, still not having read the proposal. The vote passed by the narrowest of margins in the dead of night. After the corruption was made public, the finance department, holders of the company’s purse strings, had several re-votes to cancel the soda machine contract, all of which passed, though the Business Unit managers blocked attempts at cancellation.

A majority of the employees still dislike the soda machine. After being told that soda prices would decrease substantially, soda prices have risen at a faster rate than before the machine was installed. The employees have had to pay higher prices for things like bottle openers (due to tax hikes on soda pop devices) for 3 years and STILL the machines have not yet even been fully or properly installed. Many employees are even having their hours cut due to the costs associated with running the machine.

It’s payroll time and the financial managers, seeing that the soda pop machine is costing the company significantly more than it was promised to cost (a determination that the company’s budget office made as well), realize that keeping the machine around will be financially unsustainable and the quality of the pop reduced. They have been campaigning to take out the machine and replace it with another, more sustainable, workable and effective soda pop distribution mechanism, like being able to buy soda pop across state lines, for example, but the business unit managers refuse to speak to the finance managers.

The financial managers decide that, until ALL of the managers can negotiate regarding the financially unsustainable soda machine, they would not proceed with appropriations for non-critical business functions, which affects only about 17% of the company. The CEO, being petty and vidictive, decides to close all of the company’s playgrounds, even those that are not company owned, just so he could make it more painful for employees while trying to blame the financial managers for the disruption. Just to rub salt into the wound, he even goes out of his way to spend money to fence off open-air playgrounds that are open to employees even when staff is not on duty.

While the standoff continues, though, the CEO continues to play on company-owned golf courses which he keeps open for his use.

So what should we do?
Answer: We should fire the corrupt business unit managers that bulldozed the proposal through, against the will of the employees. We should remove the pop machine that has done too much damange financially already and replace it with a new proposal for a soda pop distribution method that all sides can agree on (that will actually work!).

Lastly, We should also fire the CEO, who is supposed to be a leader and not a petty, vidictive child, who tries to blame everything on his enemies (much like he did for the first half of his career when he blamed the company’s state on the previous CEO, forgetting that ALL of the management groups were opposed to that CEO for the two years prior to his retirement and, during which time the company started its decline).

Why doesn’t bill just make his own choice and allow the soda machine to stay while just choosing himself to have water or another drink he does approve of while others are able to make their own choice and get what they want. What is it about Bill that he feels the need to always control other peoples choices and have a profound voice over their lives.

Simple solution if Bill doesn’t want a soda he doesn’t have to use the soda machine…

Perspective: If bill doesn’t like the Soda machine he doesn’t have to use it. But if Bill gets a fine for not using the Soda machine and is forced to get 23 different flavors of Soda then Bill has every reason to oppose the soda machine. Because now its not about choice its about forcing something on Bill he doesn’t want and in that case Bill is standing up for his right to not be forced into doing something he doesn’t want to do.

Also of the company is 17,000 dollars in debt and the said soda machine adds 100 dollars to that debt monthly then it would be prudent to find a solution that allows the company to tackle the debt before it takes on any more things it wants until it can afford it. Here it would be prudent for the company to pay down the debts and not incur more until its fiscal security was balanced and budgeted for new items like said soda machine.

Why doesn’t bill just make his own choice and allow the soda machine to stay while just choosing himself to have water or another drink he does approve of while others are able to make their own choice and get what they want. What is it about Bill that he feels the need to always control other peoples choices and have a profound voice over their lives.

Simple solution if Bill doesn’t want a soda he doesn’t have to use the soda machine…

Perspective: If bill doesn’t like the Soda machine he doesn’t have to use it. But if Bill gets a fine for not using the Soda machine and is forced to get 23 different flavors of Soda then Bill has every reason to oppose the soda machine. Because now its not about choice its about forcing something on Bill he doesn’t want and in that case Bill is standing up for his right to not be forced into doing something he doesn’t want to do.

Also of the company is 17,000 dollars in debt and the said soda machine adds 100 dollars to that debt monthly then it would be prudent to find a solution that allows the company to tackle the debt before it takes on any more things it wants until it can afford it. Here it would be prudent for the company to pay down the debts and not incur more until its fiscal security was balanced and budgeted for new items like said soda machine.

Why doesn’t bill just make his own choice and allow the soda machine to stay while just choosing himself to have water or another drink he does approve of while others are able to make their own choice and get what they want. What is it about Bill that he feels the need to always control other peoples choices and have a profound voice over their lives.

Simple solution if Bill doesn’t want a soda he doesn’t have to use the soda machine…

Perspective: If bill doesn’t like the Soda machine he doesn’t have to use it. But if Bill gets a fine for not using the Soda machine and is forced to get 23 different flavors of Soda then Bill has every reason to oppose the soda machine. Because now its not about choice its about forcing something on Bill he doesn’t want and in that case Bill is standing up for his right to not be forced into doing something he doesn’t want to do.

Also of the company is 17,000 dollars in debt and the said soda machine adds 100 dollars to that debt monthly then it would be prudent to find a solution that allows the company to tackle the debt before it takes on any more things it wants until it can afford it. Here it would be prudent for the company to pay down the debts and not incur more until its fiscal security was balanced and budgeted for new items like said soda machine.

Already had a go-round with this attempt to paint Republicans in general and Tea Party Republicans in particular as obstructionist assholes that care only for their perceived damaged ideology at the expense of the well-being of the whole country. Do I have to bother to explain, AGAIN, how “Obamacare” will KILL MY WIFE? This whole thing reminds me of how Evangelical Christians attempt to Jesify Jewish people by quoting passages from a book we don’t even believe in or recognize. I am very disappointed to see this whole politically-motivated discussion appear on the feed of Facebook people I follow for non-political reasons. Go ahead, Libtards, hit me AGAIN with the Trifecta of Responses you trot out for anyone that DARES criticize Dear Leader Imamba: Ad hominem attack. Paint me as a RACIST. Blame Bush. Maybe I should respond with my discussion of Disney World vis-à-vis ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

Already had a go-round with this attempt to paint Republicans in general and Tea Party Republicans in particular as obstructionist assholes that care only for their perceived damaged ideology at the expense of the well-being of the whole country. Do I have to bother to explain, AGAIN, how “Obamacare” will KILL MY WIFE? This whole thing reminds me of how Evangelical Christians attempt to Jesify Jewish people by quoting passages from a book we don’t even believe in or recognize. I am very disappointed to see this whole politically-motivated discussion appear on the feed of Facebook people I follow for non-political reasons. Go ahead, Libtards, hit me AGAIN with the Trifecta of Responses you trot out for anyone that DARES criticize Dear Leader Imamba: Ad hominem attack. Paint me as a RACIST. Blame Bush. Maybe I should respond with my discussion of Disney World vis-à-vis ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

Already had a go-round with this attempt to paint Republicans in general and Tea Party Republicans in particular as obstructionist assholes that care only for their perceived damaged ideology at the expense of the well-being of the whole country. Do I have to bother to explain, AGAIN, how “Obamacare” will KILL MY WIFE? This whole thing reminds me of how Evangelical Christians attempt to Jesify Jewish people by quoting passages from a book we don’t even believe in or recognize. I am very disappointed to see this whole politically-motivated discussion appear on the feed of Facebook people I follow for non-political reasons. Go ahead, Libtards, hit me AGAIN with the Trifecta of Responses you trot out for anyone that DARES criticize Dear Leader Imamba: Ad hominem attack. Paint me as a RACIST. Blame Bush. Maybe I should respond with my discussion of Disney World vis-à-vis ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

See, others had warned Bill about a mysterious illness that could kill him unless he had a soft drink every day. Bill heard about this happening to others but being the healthy and optimist person he is he brushed the warnings aside and enjoyed the little spare change he saved every day on something else.

Now Bill is ill and his life has been turned upside down. If only he had foreseen this; maybe he could have set those savings aside for this eventuality. Sadly he didn’t. Now he’s facing two choices. He can simply stand by his convictions and die and be remembered as the man who stood resolute against soft drinks. As nobel and grandiose as this sounds, this choice is not very appealing to Bill. See, Bill has a family. He has a little daughter he loves very much and would like to see grow.

Suddenly it’s all clear for Bill. The man who once was so vocal about soft drinks will go to the soft drink clinic and get his treatment at any cost. He knows he can’t afford it but luckily Bill lives in a country where his life is valued and every possible mean will be taken to give him the treatment he needs. The cost of his treatment will be sky high as he’ll need tons of soft drinks now.

If only Bill had a soft drink a day his illness might have been avoided or discovered at an earlier stage. Now it’s too late and treatment will cost much more. He’ll be ruined but he’ll be alive. The rest of the costs will be picked up by those who are having daily sodas. They will pay more but they will know that their contribution saved Bill’s life as those of many other who don’t believe in soft drinks.

See, others had warned Bill about a mysterious illness that could kill him unless he had a soft drink every day. Bill heard about this happening to others but being the healthy and optimist person he is he brushed the warnings aside and enjoyed the little spare change he saved every day on something else.

Now Bill is ill and his life has been turned upside down. If only he had foreseen this; maybe he could have set those savings aside for this eventuality. Sadly he didn’t. Now he’s facing two choices. He can simply stand by his convictions and die and be remembered as the man who stood resolute against soft drinks. As nobel and grandiose as this sounds, this choice is not very appealing to Bill. See, Bill has a family. He has a little daughter he loves very much and would like to see grow.

Suddenly it’s all clear for Bill. The man who once was so vocal about soft drinks will go to the soft drink clinic and get his treatment at any cost. He knows he can’t afford it but luckily Bill lives in a country where his life is valued and every possible mean will be taken to give him the treatment he needs. The cost of his treatment will be sky high as he’ll need tons of soft drinks now.

If only Bill had a soft drink a day his illness might have been avoided or discovered at an earlier stage. Now it’s too late and treatment will cost much more. He’ll be ruined but he’ll be alive. The rest of the costs will be picked up by those who are having daily sodas. They will pay more but they will know that their contribution saved Bill’s life as those of many other who don’t believe in soft drinks.

Christopher Brouelette ‘s explanation in combination with Dan mc’s is really spot on and makes much more sense to me. And I’m a left leaning independent.. So all this left vs right and libertarian vs tea party nonsense is just that. This issue doesn’t stick to strict partisan lines. Looks like I’m going to be fined 90 dollars a year simply because I cant afford health insurance. What the hell is that about? Talk about taxation w/o representation.. ffs.. it’s like we stepped back in time 237 years. In 237 years time we have become exactly what so many have fought against and died for. We are the New Britain.
Quality health care is so exorbitantly priced that insurance companies have to charge an arm and a leg. There is the real elephant in the room. Bring down the price of health care like it is in countries where this tax works and you will see a lot less people against it. And yeah, I called it a tax for a reason, because it is.

Christopher Brouelette ‘s explanation in combination with Dan mc’s is really spot on and makes much more sense to me. And I’m a left leaning independent.. So all this left vs right and libertarian vs tea party nonsense is just that. This issue doesn’t stick to strict partisan lines. Looks like I’m going to be fined 90 dollars a year simply because I cant afford health insurance. What the hell is that about? Talk about taxation w/o representation.. ffs.. it’s like we stepped back in time 237 years. In 237 years time we have become exactly what so many have fought against and died for. We are the New Britain.
Quality health care is so exorbitantly priced that insurance companies have to charge an arm and a leg. There is the real elephant in the room. Bring down the price of health care like it is in countries where this tax works and you will see a lot less people against it. And yeah, I called it a tax for a reason, because it is.

Further suppose that when the company agreed to provide a soda machine, the board of directors waited until the middle of the night, when the accounting department and contracting offices were closed, to contract for the service. When asked the next morning about the terms of the contract the board chairman responded that she was not sure what is in the contract since it was signed while the lights were off.

Despite assurances that the sodas would not cost more than the soda’s in the local café and that whatever preferences for sodas the workers had would be maintained, in reality the supplied sodas doubled in price and the selections were completely changed.

The day the soda machine arrived it was discovered that it could not keep the sodas cold, would only accept pennies, and jammed for every third customer. The board refused to accept responsibility for the machine and its performance. All attempts to reason with management failed.

Christopher Brouelette ‘s explanation in combination with Dan mc’s is really spot on and makes much more sense to me. And I’m a left leaning independent.. So all this left vs right and libertarian vs tea party nonsense is just that. This issue doesn’t stick to strict partisan lines. Looks like I’m going to be fined 90 dollars a year simply because I cant afford health insurance. What the hell is that about? Talk about taxation w/o representation.. ffs.. it’s like we stepped back in time 237 years. In 237 years time we have become exactly what so many have fought against and died for. We are the New Britain.
Quality health care is so exorbitantly priced that insurance companies have to charge an arm and a leg. There is the real elephant in the room. Bring down the price of health care like it is in countries where this tax works and you will see a lot less people against it. And yeah, I called it a tax for a reason, because it is.

Further suppose that when the company agreed to provide a soda machine, the board of directors waited until the middle of the night, when the accounting department and contracting offices were closed, to contract for the service. When asked the next morning about the terms of the contract the board chairman responded that she was not sure what is in the contract since it was signed while the lights were off.

Despite assurances that the sodas would not cost more than the soda’s in the local café and that whatever preferences for sodas the workers had would be maintained, in reality the supplied sodas doubled in price and the selections were completely changed.

The day the soda machine arrived it was discovered that it could not keep the sodas cold, would only accept pennies, and jammed for every third customer. The board refused to accept responsibility for the machine and its performance. All attempts to reason with management failed.

Imagine that Bill…being from accounting, knows that Company management is fiscally irresponsible, and continually spends money they don’t have, and really can’t afford to purchase the soda machines in the first place, and ultimately will have to lay off employees or reduce their hours because their racking up trillions in debt purchasing the soda machines and other crap, which will eventually cause the Company to go belly up.
Imagine then the company tells its employees who didn’t want the soda machines in the first place, that they had to buy a soda from the machine every month, or they would be fined.
Now imagine that Bill, as part of management, has been given the authority by the shareholders, to stop the company from purchasing the soda machines until they are able to be fiscally prudent without spend money they don’t have.
Imagine that the soda machine…or soda “machines”, which will cost more than originally stated, causing the company to have to reduce hours or lay off more employees.
Imagine also that Bill has offered management a number of proposals which will allow them to be fiscally responsible, and that if, the company postpone the purchase of the soda machines for a year when they are able to buy them without borrowing money, they wouldn’t have to reduce hours or fire any employees, but the company says it will not discuss any compromises.
Imagine that people called Bill A Fucking Jackass for trying to make sure our elected officials are held accountable for the waste and corruption inherent in management.
And finely imagine that you are an employee owned company and that you could just vote out the old stale, childish, self-servicing, arrogant corrupt management, and fire the misguided young president, and build a team that will work together for the employees, shareholders, and the constitution.
Yeah right…in a perfect world.

Imagine that Bill…being from accounting, knows that Company management is fiscally irresponsible, and continually spends money they don’t have, and really can’t afford to purchase the soda machines in the first place, and ultimately will have to lay off employees or reduce their hours because their racking up trillions in debt purchasing the soda machines and other crap, which will eventually cause the Company to go belly up.
Imagine then the company tells its employees who didn’t want the soda machines in the first place, that they had to buy a soda from the machine every month, or they would be fined.
Now imagine that Bill, as part of management, has been given the authority by the shareholders, to stop the company from purchasing the soda machines until they are able to be fiscally prudent without spend money they don’t have.
Imagine that the soda machine…or soda “machines”, which will cost more than originally stated, causing the company to have to reduce hours or lay off more employees.
Imagine also that Bill has offered management a number of proposals which will allow them to be fiscally responsible, and that if, the company postpone the purchase of the soda machines for a year when they are able to buy them without borrowing money, they wouldn’t have to reduce hours or fire any employees, but the company says it will not discuss any compromises.
Imagine that people called Bill A Fucking Jackass for trying to make sure our elected officials are held accountable for the waste and corruption inherent in management.
And finely imagine that you are an employee owned company and that you could just vote out the old stale, childish, self-servicing, arrogant corrupt management, and fire the misguided young president, and build a team that will work together for the employees, shareholders, and the constitution.
Yeah right…in a perfect world.

Imagine that Bill…being from accounting, knows that Company management is fiscally irresponsible, and continually spends money they don’t have, and really can’t afford to purchase the soda machines in the first place, and ultimately will have to lay off employees or reduce their hours because their racking up trillions in debt purchasing the soda machines and other crap, which will eventually cause the Company to go belly up.
Imagine then the company tells its employees who didn’t want the soda machines in the first place, that they had to buy a soda from the machine every month, or they would be fined.
Now imagine that Bill, as part of management, has been given the authority by the shareholders, to stop the company from purchasing the soda machines until they are able to be fiscally prudent without spend money they don’t have.
Imagine that the soda machine…or soda “machines”, which will cost more than originally stated, causing the company to have to reduce hours or lay off more employees.
Imagine also that Bill has offered management a number of proposals which will allow them to be fiscally responsible, and that if, the company postpone the purchase of the soda machines for a year when they are able to buy them without borrowing money, they wouldn’t have to reduce hours or fire any employees, but the company says it will not discuss any compromises.
Imagine that people called Bill A Fucking Jackass for trying to make sure our elected officials are held accountable for the waste and corruption inherent in management.
And finely imagine that you are an employee owned company and that you could just vote out the old stale, childish, self-servicing, arrogant corrupt management, and fire the misguided young president, and build a team that will work together for the employees, shareholders, and the constitution.
Yeah right…in a perfect world.

This is what English Soda tastes like:
A long time ago we decided that everyone should have access to soda, no matter their ability to pay for it. Why? Because at some point everyone needs some cola in their lives.
That’s a lot of soda. It costs quite a bit. It’s one of our companies largest outgoings. So, do we spend more on soda overall? No, we send about 45% less per capita. Why? We buy it in bulk, and the company gets a better deal for everyone. We don’t pay our soda experts enough. We’ve spent a long time making the system as efficient as possible. We don’t pay unnecessary sums to insurance companies.
This is how most companies buy soda. Check out the best explanation I’ve seen in a while.

This is what English Soda tastes like:
A long time ago we decided that everyone should have access to soda, no matter their ability to pay for it. Why? Because at some point everyone needs some cola in their lives.
That’s a lot of soda. It costs quite a bit. It’s one of our companies largest outgoings. So, do we spend more on soda overall? No, we send about 45% less per capita. Why? We buy it in bulk, and the company gets a better deal for everyone. We don’t pay our soda experts enough. We’ve spent a long time making the system as efficient as possible. We don’t pay unnecessary sums to insurance companies.
This is how most companies buy soda. Check out the best explanation I’ve seen in a while.

This is what English Soda tastes like:
A long time ago we decided that everyone should have access to soda, no matter their ability to pay for it. Why? Because at some point everyone needs some cola in their lives.
That’s a lot of soda. It costs quite a bit. It’s one of our companies largest outgoings. So, do we spend more on soda overall? No, we send about 45% less per capita. Why? We buy it in bulk, and the company gets a better deal for everyone. We don’t pay our soda experts enough. We’ve spent a long time making the system as efficient as possible. We don’t pay unnecessary sums to insurance companies.
This is how most companies buy soda. Check out the best explanation I’ve seen in a while.

How do we fix the system? From my point of view (and I know others may disagree) our government should offer healthcare to every American with a focus on preventative care – paid for through taxes. We should encourage competitive pricing on medical equipment and supplies and get rid of the “middle man” which would cut the cost of healthcare drastically (saline costs, on average, $1.00 but the hospital bills a patient closer to $500, and that’s not counting the IV administering costs). There should also be the option to use private healthcare facilities if you can afford insurance and wish to use it. It seems like the obvious solution but I am no expert. Many countries have healthcare systems like this and rank higher in quality and lower in cost per capita. Like I said, I am no expert, but shouldn’t public/private option work?

How do we fix the system? From my point of view (and I know others may disagree) our government should offer healthcare to every American with a focus on preventative care – paid for through taxes. We should encourage competitive pricing on medical equipment and supplies and get rid of the “middle man” which would cut the cost of healthcare drastically (saline costs, on average, $1.00 but the hospital bills a patient closer to $500, and that’s not counting the IV administering costs). There should also be the option to use private healthcare facilities if you can afford insurance and wish to use it. It seems like the obvious solution but I am no expert. Many countries have healthcare systems like this and rank higher in quality and lower in cost per capita. Like I said, I am no expert, but shouldn’t public/private option work?

How do we fix the system? From my point of view (and I know others may disagree) our government should offer healthcare to every American with a focus on preventative care – paid for through taxes. We should encourage competitive pricing on medical equipment and supplies and get rid of the “middle man” which would cut the cost of healthcare drastically (saline costs, on average, $1.00 but the hospital bills a patient closer to $500, and that’s not counting the IV administering costs). There should also be the option to use private healthcare facilities if you can afford insurance and wish to use it. It seems like the obvious solution but I am no expert. Many countries have healthcare systems like this and rank higher in quality and lower in cost per capita. Like I said, I am no expert, but shouldn’t public/private option work?

What this story fails to communicate, and what Bill is probably trying to inform is; this soda machine, who pays for it? What kind of soda is going to be stocked? What choice will one have? What is the price for the soda? What if I want to bring my own soda, will I be fined?, the added cost to overhead from the depreciation of the cost of the machine, the added electrical costs, the maintenance costs, the extra labor costs to go buy soda, stock the machine, and account for monies. Since nobody bothered to read the fine print on the Soda machine, they just thought it was a good idea. Bill being in accounting could see all these problems the new soda machine was going to cause, and because he’s exercising good judgement, he’s being crucified and called names.

What this story fails to communicate, and what Bill is probably trying to inform is; this soda machine, who pays for it? What kind of soda is going to be stocked? What choice will one have? What is the price for the soda? What if I want to bring my own soda, will I be fined?, the added cost to overhead from the depreciation of the cost of the machine, the added electrical costs, the maintenance costs, the extra labor costs to go buy soda, stock the machine, and account for monies. Since nobody bothered to read the fine print on the Soda machine, they just thought it was a good idea. Bill being in accounting could see all these problems the new soda machine was going to cause, and because he’s exercising good judgement, he’s being crucified and called names.

I LOVE it. Except add in the part where the IRS requires your company to hire 4 people to audit the soda machine monthly and ensure it is in compliance with federal law. This means your boss has to lay off 6 personnel to ensure the books stay balanced. Why 6? Well, 4 to offset the administrative penalties and fees the auditors require and 2 to offset all the sodas that he is now required to provide free of charge to all of his workers.

Luckily this specific soda machine has rules that only apply to 50 or more full time workers so the boss is incentivized to move most of his personnel to part time just to keep the business doors open.

Another great byproduct is now that the soda machine is free for all workers (whether they need it or not) people will use it more frequently (whether they need it or not) which is pretty damn taxing on a health care industry, er, soda machine that is already quite bogged down.

What’s better is that when I walk up to a free soda machine I don’t waste my time with a measly $0.50 Diet Coke. I might as well get that $2.50 MONSTER energy drink. They both give me the caffeine to get through my afternoon, sure, but what the heck, I’m not paying. When the MONSTERs and Diet Cokes fly off the shelves faster than ever the law of Supply and Demand does some pretty funny things with the price of those products (Spoiler Alert: it increases OR you run out of product and have to start rationing).

Someone has to pay for it. There’s no wonder Bill is campaigning against the machine. He’s paying for everyone else’s drinks!

Annnnnnd scene.

Answer: Fire everyone who is up for reelection regardless of political affiliation. Everyone is effing this up from the idiots who wrote the bill and forced it through without reading it to the idiots that are shutting down the gov’t trying to remove it. All of them.

What this story fails to communicate, and what Bill is probably trying to inform is; this soda machine, who pays for it? What kind of soda is going to be stocked? What choice will one have? What is the price for the soda? What if I want to bring my own soda, will I be fined?, the added cost to overhead from the depreciation of the cost of the machine, the added electrical costs, the maintenance costs, the extra labor costs to go buy soda, stock the machine, and account for monies. Since nobody bothered to read the fine print on the Soda machine, they just thought it was a good idea. Bill being in accounting could see all these problems the new soda machine was going to cause, and because he’s exercising good judgement, he’s being crucified and called names.

I LOVE it. Except add in the part where the IRS requires your company to hire 4 people to audit the soda machine monthly and ensure it is in compliance with federal law. This means your boss has to lay off 6 personnel to ensure the books stay balanced. Why 6? Well, 4 to offset the administrative penalties and fees the auditors require and 2 to offset all the sodas that he is now required to provide free of charge to all of his workers.

Luckily this specific soda machine has rules that only apply to 50 or more full time workers so the boss is incentivized to move most of his personnel to part time just to keep the business doors open.

Another great byproduct is now that the soda machine is free for all workers (whether they need it or not) people will use it more frequently (whether they need it or not) which is pretty damn taxing on a health care industry, er, soda machine that is already quite bogged down.

What’s better is that when I walk up to a free soda machine I don’t waste my time with a measly $0.50 Diet Coke. I might as well get that $2.50 MONSTER energy drink. They both give me the caffeine to get through my afternoon, sure, but what the heck, I’m not paying. When the MONSTERs and Diet Cokes fly off the shelves faster than ever the law of Supply and Demand does some pretty funny things with the price of those products (Spoiler Alert: it increases OR you run out of product and have to start rationing).

Someone has to pay for it. There’s no wonder Bill is campaigning against the machine. He’s paying for everyone else’s drinks!

Annnnnnd scene.

Answer: Fire everyone who is up for reelection regardless of political affiliation. Everyone is effing this up from the idiots who wrote the bill and forced it through without reading it to the idiots that are shutting down the gov’t trying to remove it. All of them.

I LOVE it. Except add in the part where the IRS requires your company to hire 4 people to audit the soda machine monthly and ensure it is in compliance with federal law. This means your boss has to lay off 6 personnel to ensure the books stay balanced. Why 6? Well, 4 to offset the administrative penalties and fees the auditors require and 2 to offset all the sodas that he is now required to provide free of charge to all of his workers.

Luckily this specific soda machine has rules that only apply to 50 or more full time workers so the boss is incentivized to move most of his personnel to part time just to keep the business doors open.

Another great byproduct is now that the soda machine is free for all workers (whether they need it or not) people will use it more frequently (whether they need it or not) which is pretty damn taxing on a health care industry, er, soda machine that is already quite bogged down.

What’s better is that when I walk up to a free soda machine I don’t waste my time with a measly $0.50 Diet Coke. I might as well get that $2.50 MONSTER energy drink. They both give me the caffeine to get through my afternoon, sure, but what the heck, I’m not paying. When the MONSTERs and Diet Cokes fly off the shelves faster than ever the law of Supply and Demand does some pretty funny things with the price of those products (Spoiler Alert: it increases OR you run out of product and have to start rationing).

Someone has to pay for it. There’s no wonder Bill is campaigning against the machine. He’s paying for everyone else’s drinks!

Annnnnnd scene.

Answer: Fire everyone who is up for reelection regardless of political affiliation. Everyone is effing this up from the idiots who wrote the bill and forced it through without reading it to the idiots that are shutting down the gov’t trying to remove it. All of them.

Now imagine the person replacing Bill is super cool and agreeable then, come to find out overpays everyone on the payroll just out of sincere ignorance. But, he loves soda and is the first to point out that the soda machine takes your money but if you hit it hard enough it delivers a pop but, it’s always warm. Now the super cool boss that everyone loves because of his ethnicity(or partial ethnicity. who cares? he’s darker than you and therefore more intimidating in a cool sort of way, so how can you possibly ever say no to him. Hell, you helped get him hired and you want everyone to remember that!) looks like an empty headed doofus of an empty suit AND all that voted for the stupid machine knows the damned thing don’t work because it’s unplugged but won’t plug it in because they say it’s not their job. That the boss should do it. But he claims that Bill broke it before he left and everyone is too scared to disagree with the boss because he might (gasp) yell at them. They then bring Bill back and try to force him to fix the machine and he says to get rid of it. Then everyone says they can’t do without the soda machine. So Bill tips his hat and says,”You know my number. Call me when you really want to fix the machine.”

It just seems to me that people are so against restriction of individual freedom that they don’t even realize a smart public policy when it finally comes around. Medical bills are the #1 cause of bankruptcy in the US. We live in a society that will not refuse medical care in emergencies and we’d probably be outraged otherwise. Being uninsured not only affects the bankrupted individual, but government funds are continuously needed to keep many public hospitals in operation. 2-4% of a family’s annual income to control the terrible state of healthcare and govt spending in this country? Unless you’re a private insurance company or a doctor who expects compensation cuts, why is this even a battle?

Now imagine the person replacing Bill is super cool and agreeable then, come to find out overpays everyone on the payroll just out of sincere ignorance. But, he loves soda and is the first to point out that the soda machine takes your money but if you hit it hard enough it delivers a pop but, it’s always warm. Now the super cool boss that everyone loves because of his ethnicity(or partial ethnicity. who cares? he’s darker than you and therefore more intimidating in a cool sort of way, so how can you possibly ever say no to him. Hell, you helped get him hired and you want everyone to remember that!) looks like an empty headed doofus of an empty suit AND all that voted for the stupid machine knows the damned thing don’t work because it’s unplugged but won’t plug it in because they say it’s not their job. That the boss should do it. But he claims that Bill broke it before he left and everyone is too scared to disagree with the boss because he might (gasp) yell at them. They then bring Bill back and try to force him to fix the machine and he says to get rid of it. Then everyone says they can’t do without the soda machine. So Bill tips his hat and says,”You know my number. Call me when you really want to fix the machine.”

It just seems to me that people are so against restriction of individual freedom that they don’t even realize a smart public policy when it finally comes around. Medical bills are the #1 cause of bankruptcy in the US. We live in a society that will not refuse medical care in emergencies and we’d probably be outraged otherwise. Being uninsured not only affects the bankrupted individual, but government funds are continuously needed to keep many public hospitals in operation. 2-4% of a family’s annual income to control the terrible state of healthcare and govt spending in this country? Unless you’re a private insurance company or a doctor who expects compensation cuts, why is this even a battle?

I think a better example would be a mandatory gym membership instead of a soda. If the company can show the insurance company that everyone goes to the gym, the insurance rates go down and the company saves a lot of money. Problem is, everybody needs a membership, so the company votes and the majority agrees to deduct a portion of each person’s salary to go to the city globo gym. Even though it might be a shitty gym, nobody is forced to actually go to it (they just have to pay for the membership). But some people will go, because they know they need to get fit, and because they couldn’t afford the globogym membership before, but the company managed to get a discount rate so now they can.

Now, Bill in accounting is the same as in the soda example, except that instead of trying to deny people drinking soda, he’s trying preventing the company from saving a shit-ton of money on their insurance premiums, which the company could use to give performance bonuses to the hard workers at the company, which makes Bill a fucking moron and a despicable turd of a human being by placing his greed of his membership money above the company’s bottom line and the general welfare of the other workers.

It just seems to me that people are so against restriction of individual freedom that they don’t even realize a smart public policy when it finally comes around. Medical bills are the #1 cause of bankruptcy in the US. We live in a society that will not refuse medical care in emergencies and we’d probably be outraged otherwise. Being uninsured not only affects the bankrupted individual, but government funds are continuously needed to keep many public hospitals in operation. 2-4% of a family’s annual income to control the terrible state of healthcare and govt spending in this country? Unless you’re a private insurance company or a doctor who expects compensation cuts, why is this even a battle?

I think a better example would be a mandatory gym membership instead of a soda. If the company can show the insurance company that everyone goes to the gym, the insurance rates go down and the company saves a lot of money. Problem is, everybody needs a membership, so the company votes and the majority agrees to deduct a portion of each person’s salary to go to the city globo gym. Even though it might be a shitty gym, nobody is forced to actually go to it (they just have to pay for the membership). But some people will go, because they know they need to get fit, and because they couldn’t afford the globogym membership before, but the company managed to get a discount rate so now they can.

Now, Bill in accounting is the same as in the soda example, except that instead of trying to deny people drinking soda, he’s trying preventing the company from saving a shit-ton of money on their insurance premiums, which the company could use to give performance bonuses to the hard workers at the company, which makes Bill a fucking moron and a despicable turd of a human being by placing his greed of his membership money above the company’s bottom line and the general welfare of the other workers.

HERE is the analogy correction that finds off the “we are trying to help people” argument. Because in the end… the soda machine/obamacare will hurt far more people than it will help.

__
The accounting office (house of reps) understands the company runs in the red. The last thing the company needs is to buy a soda machine. And since the accounting office “Bill” or whoever… controls the money (in some crazy business scheme that doesn’t rest the power of the government/business in one department)… The accounting office decides there is no soda machine until everyone that is delusional and voted for the soda machine is made to realize the actual plight of the country/business.

Also the accounting office and some of the employees remember when they had a snack machine (Soc Security/Medicare/Welfare/ aka any large Gov program). It was mismanaged. Broken. Never game the right snack. It would take money from one guy, and give a snack to another. But mostly it just took people’s money.

Later… the idiots that voted for the soda machine (union labor btw) without regard to the financial position of the company, make “SODA MACHINES” part of their union contract.

The company loses more money in overhead because of continuous bad decision making like “soda machines you can’t afford” and eventually fails… It is bought out by two companies. One in Russia, the other in China. Now the employee’s get paid $3.00 an hour and if they complain they are fired on the spot. But a bunch of crybabies got soda for a while. So I guess it’s ok.

HERE is the analogy correction that finds off the “we are trying to help people” argument. Because in the end… the soda machine/obamacare will hurt far more people than it will help.

__
The accounting office (house of reps) understands the company runs in the red. The last thing the company needs is to buy a soda machine. And since the accounting office “Bill” or whoever… controls the money (in some crazy business scheme that doesn’t rest the power of the government/business in one department)… The accounting office decides there is no soda machine until everyone that is delusional and voted for the soda machine is made to realize the actual plight of the country/business.

Also the accounting office and some of the employees remember when they had a snack machine (Soc Security/Medicare/Welfare/ aka any large Gov program). It was mismanaged. Broken. Never game the right snack. It would take money from one guy, and give a snack to another. But mostly it just took people’s money.

Later… the idiots that voted for the soda machine (union labor btw) without regard to the financial position of the company, make “SODA MACHINES” part of their union contract.

The company loses more money in overhead because of continuous bad decision making like “soda machines you can’t afford” and eventually fails… It is bought out by two companies. One in Russia, the other in China. Now the employee’s get paid $3.00 an hour and if they complain they are fired on the spot. But a bunch of crybabies got soda for a while. So I guess it’s ok.

HERE is the analogy correction that finds off the “we are trying to help people” argument. Because in the end… the soda machine/obamacare will hurt far more people than it will help.

__
The accounting office (house of reps) understands the company runs in the red. The last thing the company needs is to buy a soda machine. And since the accounting office “Bill” or whoever… controls the money (in some crazy business scheme that doesn’t rest the power of the government/business in one department)… The accounting office decides there is no soda machine until everyone that is delusional and voted for the soda machine is made to realize the actual plight of the country/business.

Also the accounting office and some of the employees remember when they had a snack machine (Soc Security/Medicare/Welfare/ aka any large Gov program). It was mismanaged. Broken. Never game the right snack. It would take money from one guy, and give a snack to another. But mostly it just took people’s money.

Later… the idiots that voted for the soda machine (union labor btw) without regard to the financial position of the company, make “SODA MACHINES” part of their union contract.

The company loses more money in overhead because of continuous bad decision making like “soda machines you can’t afford” and eventually fails… It is bought out by two companies. One in Russia, the other in China. Now the employee’s get paid $3.00 an hour and if they complain they are fired on the spot. But a bunch of crybabies got soda for a while. So I guess it’s ok.

author – you almost nailed it. your analogy needs a few minor adjustments.
1. Bill, the accountant (not the doctor), is concerned that everyone outside the office will have to buy beverages from this large machine. This may shut down the mom&pop corner stores who can’t keep up with the _______ (fill in blank: regulation, pricing, etc…) large soda machine his company voted on.
2. Bill knows that the demand for soda will soon outstrip supply from this machine and the thirstiest people may have to wait in long lines for smaller sodas. They may only hope for a change, and their corner store to reopen.
3. Bill must be concerned about the supply side of purchasing soda for this large machine. Could the price of replenishing this soda at some point be more expensive than the advertised selling price? This really isn’t a concern for those who voted YES for the machine, they don’t drink from it and they know that they will just need to vote others to pitch in additional pocket change to help buy the soda.

author – you almost nailed it. your analogy needs a few minor adjustments.
1. Bill, the accountant (not the doctor), is concerned that everyone outside the office will have to buy beverages from this large machine. This may shut down the mom&pop corner stores who can’t keep up with the _______ (fill in blank: regulation, pricing, etc…) large soda machine his company voted on.
2. Bill knows that the demand for soda will soon outstrip supply from this machine and the thirstiest people may have to wait in long lines for smaller sodas. They may only hope for a change, and their corner store to reopen.
3. Bill must be concerned about the supply side of purchasing soda for this large machine. Could the price of replenishing this soda at some point be more expensive than the advertised selling price? This really isn’t a concern for those who voted YES for the machine, they don’t drink from it and they know that they will just need to vote others to pitch in additional pocket change to help buy the soda.

no one is against the pros of the law. those that oppose ACA just feel that the cons outweigh the pros. It’s the simple fact that it will raise taxes through penalties, it’s a mandate forcing you to buy something you may not even want. If you think about it this mandate basically makes your body FEDERAL Property and you won’t be able to make input into your own care. It seems like a step towards fascism. I couldn’t have said it any better that Chris Broulette. People are failing to see the the extreme repercussions if this law isn’t repealed. Yes, in an ideal world it’s good to help the ones in need but not at the expense of personal liberties. Keep in mind we are talking about a corrupt gov here that continuously lies to the public and steadily getting worse by cloaking the bill with all these goodies but then uses MANDATES, how unconstitutional. look at how they schemed and argued to get the law passed in the first place by saying the mandate was actually a form of penalty tax. to me this is all a good guise to deflect the American attention to how the shutdown ISN”T affecting the expansion of the military complex, NSA snooping and drones. cut those trillions and use that to help the americans instead of mandating us…keep us truly free by fighting for the Constitution. It’s never good to have more gov intervention. I’ll leave you with this quote from Ben Franklin “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety,deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

no one is against the pros of the law. those that oppose ACA just feel that the cons outweigh the pros. It’s the simple fact that it will raise taxes through penalties, it’s a mandate forcing you to buy something you may not even want. If you think about it this mandate basically makes your body FEDERAL Property and you won’t be able to make input into your own care. It seems like a step towards fascism. I couldn’t have said it any better that Chris Broulette. People are failing to see the the extreme repercussions if this law isn’t repealed. Yes, in an ideal world it’s good to help the ones in need but not at the expense of personal liberties. Keep in mind we are talking about a corrupt gov here that continuously lies to the public and steadily getting worse by cloaking the bill with all these goodies but then uses MANDATES, how unconstitutional. look at how they schemed and argued to get the law passed in the first place by saying the mandate was actually a form of penalty tax. to me this is all a good guise to deflect the American attention to how the shutdown ISN”T affecting the expansion of the military complex, NSA snooping and drones. cut those trillions and use that to help the americans instead of mandating us…keep us truly free by fighting for the Constitution. It’s never good to have more gov intervention. I’ll leave you with this quote from Ben Franklin “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety,deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

So, Imagine that that all of the soda drinkers(51%) in a company got together without inviting the non-soda drinkers to see if it was a good idea to put a variable priced soda machine in the break room. Since they held the majority, it was a slam dunk. Five months of construction later the soda machine was built.

Now imagine that Bill (a non-soda drinker) in accounting, has been watching the books, saying the company is deeply in debt and cant afford the custom machine during its construction but nobody listens to him. Near the end of the construction the board of trustees, promotes him to Director of Finance.

Bill in accounting does the math. Normally sodas cost $.90, but the soda-drinkers state that they want $.25 sodas for those that have trouble affording it. Bill shows that there aren’t enough soda-drinkers to offset the cost. So the soda-drinkers say that even if you’re not a soda drinker, you have to buy a soda at $1. Bill shows them that it still doesn’t cover the cost. So the soda-drinkers say that the company will make up the difference. Bill shows them the company can’t afford it, and the soda-drinkers tell him to get another loan.

Personally Bill doesn’t want to buy soda he won’t drink. As an investor in the company he doesn’t want to see the company collapse. The CEO who is a soda drinker, is being forced to retire, states that despite the boards objections hes going give the Directors a raise to offset the cost they have to pay for sodas.

Bill believes that the CEO doesn’t care about the company, because his retirement plan is bullet-proof. Bill attempts to negotiate, but the soda-drinkers refuse to even listen to him or look at the books. Bill decides to make a stand, since the company doesn’t have the money he asks which things the soda-drinkers want to fund. Regardless, the soda drinkers demand that the company take out another loan and Bill continue to pay for soda he doesn’t want.

So, Imagine that that all of the soda drinkers(51%) in a company got together without inviting the non-soda drinkers to see if it was a good idea to put a variable priced soda machine in the break room. Since they held the majority, it was a slam dunk. Five months of construction later the soda machine was built.

Now imagine that Bill (a non-soda drinker) in accounting, has been watching the books, saying the company is deeply in debt and cant afford the custom machine during its construction but nobody listens to him. Near the end of the construction the board of trustees, promotes him to Director of Finance.

Bill in accounting does the math. Normally sodas cost $.90, but the soda-drinkers state that they want $.25 sodas for those that have trouble affording it. Bill shows that there aren’t enough soda-drinkers to offset the cost. So the soda-drinkers say that even if you’re not a soda drinker, you have to buy a soda at $1. Bill shows them that it still doesn’t cover the cost. So the soda-drinkers say that the company will make up the difference. Bill shows them the company can’t afford it, and the soda-drinkers tell him to get another loan.

Personally Bill doesn’t want to buy soda he won’t drink. As an investor in the company he doesn’t want to see the company collapse. The CEO who is a soda drinker, is being forced to retire, states that despite the boards objections hes going give the Directors a raise to offset the cost they have to pay for sodas.

Bill believes that the CEO doesn’t care about the company, because his retirement plan is bullet-proof. Bill attempts to negotiate, but the soda-drinkers refuse to even listen to him or look at the books. Bill decides to make a stand, since the company doesn’t have the money he asks which things the soda-drinkers want to fund. Regardless, the soda drinkers demand that the company take out another loan and Bill continue to pay for soda he doesn’t want.

Multiple problems with your analogy. The majority of Americans are actually against the ACA. Also, Bill is campaigning for the majority that is not vocal but is instead the silent majority. If you quit limiting your news media to MSNBC which is a campaign arm of the Obama administration, you would realize that the ACA is a train wreck that the people you are defending exempted themselves from. If it was such a wonderful law, why did John Boheaner, Harry Reid, and the rest of the establishment on both sides of the isle exempt themselves, their staff and their family from the law they want us to live under. You’ve contributed yourself to the low information voters that have continued to secede your liberties, your freedoms, and your lives to an ever-growing federal government and socialist regime.

Multiple problems with your analogy. The majority of Americans are actually against the ACA. Also, Bill is campaigning for the majority that is not vocal but is instead the silent majority. If you quit limiting your news media to MSNBC which is a campaign arm of the Obama administration, you would realize that the ACA is a train wreck that the people you are defending exempted themselves from. If it was such a wonderful law, why did John Boheaner, Harry Reid, and the rest of the establishment on both sides of the isle exempt themselves, their staff and their family from the law they want us to live under. You’ve contributed yourself to the low information voters that have continued to secede your liberties, your freedoms, and your lives to an ever-growing federal government and socialist regime.

Multiple problems with your analogy. The majority of Americans are actually against the ACA. Also, Bill is campaigning for the majority that is not vocal but is instead the silent majority. If you quit limiting your news media to MSNBC which is a campaign arm of the Obama administration, you would realize that the ACA is a train wreck that the people you are defending exempted themselves from. If it was such a wonderful law, why did John Boheaner, Harry Reid, and the rest of the establishment on both sides of the isle exempt themselves, their staff and their family from the law they want us to live under. You’ve contributed yourself to the low information voters that have continued to secede your liberties, your freedoms, and your lives to an ever-growing federal government and socialist regime.

Everybody in the company actually is already drinking soda. Some sections already have soda dispensers where numerous competing brands transparently advertise their price, keeping the prices low. Others have chosen not to have a soda machine in their workspace (either by choice or because the price was too high) but often these folks become intensely thirsty and have to buy from special Emergency Room machines, where the price is 5x as high as normal… and often they’ve let their thirst go so long it’s turned into a full-blown diabetic-emergency or something and they need to buy 5x as much ‘soda’. And 3/4th of the time, they can’t pay, so the rest of the company ends up paying E-Room machine bills. But Bill’s gonna blow up the company’s credit rating to make sure those super-expensive E-Room machines keep humming.

Everybody in the company actually is already drinking soda. Some sections already have soda dispensers where numerous competing brands transparently advertise their price, keeping the prices low. Others have chosen not to have a soda machine in their workspace (either by choice or because the price was too high) but often these folks become intensely thirsty and have to buy from special Emergency Room machines, where the price is 5x as high as normal… and often they’ve let their thirst go so long it’s turned into a full-blown diabetic-emergency or something and they need to buy 5x as much ‘soda’. And 3/4th of the time, they can’t pay, so the rest of the company ends up paying E-Room machine bills. But Bill’s gonna blow up the company’s credit rating to make sure those super-expensive E-Room machines keep humming.

Everybody in the company actually is already drinking soda. Some sections already have soda dispensers where numerous competing brands transparently advertise their price, keeping the prices low. Others have chosen not to have a soda machine in their workspace (either by choice or because the price was too high) but often these folks become intensely thirsty and have to buy from special Emergency Room machines, where the price is 5x as high as normal… and often they’ve let their thirst go so long it’s turned into a full-blown diabetic-emergency or something and they need to buy 5x as much ‘soda’. And 3/4th of the time, they can’t pay, so the rest of the company ends up paying E-Room machine bills. But Bill’s gonna blow up the company’s credit rating to make sure those super-expensive E-Room machines keep humming.

Both analogies are very flawed.
Bill should still be fired, he has no right to make the choice to withhold payroll, in the real world the CEO would get rid of Bill in a heartbeat.
The company owner makes the final decisions in their company, they decide what machines will be allowed in their company, what will be in it and how much it will cost. If the owner decides to let a morale group make those decisions for them then that’s how it stands.
Bill sounds very arrogant as he seems to believe he is he only one that understands math.
A company owner would never let an accountant close down their company because they are in business to make money and there in lies the true flaw of the analogy. One that Republicans don’t seem to understand.
Government is not a company and should not operate like one. Companies are created for one reason, to make money, their employees are way down on the list of people they are beholden to. They worry more about stockholders and customers.
Government is formed to serve it citizens, it should be responsible to serve them only.
The citizens choose who they want to represent them, employees have no such luxury.
Citizens have a choice every several years who they want that to be.
The only truth that the analogy might hold is that either way company or government Bill won’t be employed much longer.

Both analogies are very flawed.
Bill should still be fired, he has no right to make the choice to withhold payroll, in the real world the CEO would get rid of Bill in a heartbeat.
The company owner makes the final decisions in their company, they decide what machines will be allowed in their company, what will be in it and how much it will cost. If the owner decides to let a morale group make those decisions for them then that’s how it stands.
Bill sounds very arrogant as he seems to believe he is he only one that understands math.
A company owner would never let an accountant close down their company because they are in business to make money and there in lies the true flaw of the analogy. One that Republicans don’t seem to understand.
Government is not a company and should not operate like one. Companies are created for one reason, to make money, their employees are way down on the list of people they are beholden to. They worry more about stockholders and customers.
Government is formed to serve it citizens, it should be responsible to serve them only.
The citizens choose who they want to represent them, employees have no such luxury.
Citizens have a choice every several years who they want that to be.
The only truth that the analogy might hold is that either way company or government Bill won’t be employed much longer.

Both analogies are very flawed.
Bill should still be fired, he has no right to make the choice to withhold payroll, in the real world the CEO would get rid of Bill in a heartbeat.
The company owner makes the final decisions in their company, they decide what machines will be allowed in their company, what will be in it and how much it will cost. If the owner decides to let a morale group make those decisions for them then that’s how it stands.
Bill sounds very arrogant as he seems to believe he is he only one that understands math.
A company owner would never let an accountant close down their company because they are in business to make money and there in lies the true flaw of the analogy. One that Republicans don’t seem to understand.
Government is not a company and should not operate like one. Companies are created for one reason, to make money, their employees are way down on the list of people they are beholden to. They worry more about stockholders and customers.
Government is formed to serve it citizens, it should be responsible to serve them only.
The citizens choose who they want to represent them, employees have no such luxury.
Citizens have a choice every several years who they want that to be.
The only truth that the analogy might hold is that either way company or government Bill won’t be employed much longer.

So, I’m Canadian and I am relatively ignorant on this issue and I do not have an opinion either way. However, I will say this after reading a few posts: OMG, but propaganda rules. How is ANYONE supposed to understand these issues when there are so many distorted views making the rounds?? The Left says the new bill does one thing while the Right says the new bill does the exact opposite!

Find a trusted source and get the correct information. What trusted source you say? I have no idea. But it’s not the Left, it’s not the Right, and it’s not Fox news. Find a trusted source and make an informed decision and stop regurgitating what your particular political group is telling you. For the love of God, please think for yourselves.

So, I’m Canadian and I am relatively ignorant on this issue and I do not have an opinion either way. However, I will say this after reading a few posts: OMG, but propaganda rules. How is ANYONE supposed to understand these issues when there are so many distorted views making the rounds?? The Left says the new bill does one thing while the Right says the new bill does the exact opposite!

Find a trusted source and get the correct information. What trusted source you say? I have no idea. But it’s not the Left, it’s not the Right, and it’s not Fox news. Find a trusted source and make an informed decision and stop regurgitating what your particular political group is telling you. For the love of God, please think for yourselves.

Cee Dubb: This is a suitable enough analogy for the same simpletons who fall out of their chairs laughing at “Saturday Night Live,” but let me add to what Christopher mentioned below:

Imagine that soda machine would increase the office budget by 15 percent, and that the office already had nearly lost its credit rating, which would cause salaries to go down across the board.

Not only would they require every person to buy a soda, but there was no guarantee that the soda machine would even work right. The CEO had already decided to delay the snack machine and likened the problems with the soda machine to the glitches in the new iPhone.

Imagine also that everybody in the office was to pay some portion of the soda machine according to how much they worked, but that a few employees—the ones who worked the least—would get a free soda. Bill is a middle-management guy putting in 10 hour days. He does well for the company, and he’s moderately rewarded for his efforts, but he’s decided to draw the line here after being outvoted by the part-timers who were promised a free soda…..

So, I’m Canadian and I am relatively ignorant on this issue and I do not have an opinion either way. However, I will say this after reading a few posts: OMG, but propaganda rules. How is ANYONE supposed to understand these issues when there are so many distorted views making the rounds?? The Left says the new bill does one thing while the Right says the new bill does the exact opposite!

Find a trusted source and get the correct information. What trusted source you say? I have no idea. But it’s not the Left, it’s not the Right, and it’s not Fox news. Find a trusted source and make an informed decision and stop regurgitating what your particular political group is telling you. For the love of God, please think for yourselves.

Cee Dubb: This is a suitable enough analogy for the same simpletons who fall out of their chairs laughing at “Saturday Night Live,” but let me add to what Christopher mentioned below:

Imagine that soda machine would increase the office budget by 15 percent, and that the office already had nearly lost its credit rating, which would cause salaries to go down across the board.

Not only would they require every person to buy a soda, but there was no guarantee that the soda machine would even work right. The CEO had already decided to delay the snack machine and likened the problems with the soda machine to the glitches in the new iPhone.

Imagine also that everybody in the office was to pay some portion of the soda machine according to how much they worked, but that a few employees—the ones who worked the least—would get a free soda. Bill is a middle-management guy putting in 10 hour days. He does well for the company, and he’s moderately rewarded for his efforts, but he’s decided to draw the line here after being outvoted by the part-timers who were promised a free soda…..

To make the analogy right: The soda would cost $30 dollars per bottle on average, you would have to buy one bottle each work day or be penalized 1% of your gross income and be turned over to the I.R.S. for collections, 80% of the employees would have to purchase the soda for the other 20% of employees, and as soda makers go out of business and bureaucratic red tape takes hold, it would be an inferior soda product. Does anyone still want that pop machine in the break room?

To make the analogy right: The soda would cost $30 dollars per bottle on average, you would have to buy one bottle each work day or be penalized 1% of your gross income and be turned over to the I.R.S. for collections, 80% of the employees would have to purchase the soda for the other 20% of employees, and as soda makers go out of business and bureaucratic red tape takes hold, it would be an inferior soda product. Does anyone still want that pop machine in the break room?

To make the analogy right: The soda would cost $30 dollars per bottle on average, you would have to buy one bottle each work day or be penalized 1% of your gross income and be turned over to the I.R.S. for collections, 80% of the employees would have to purchase the soda for the other 20% of employees, and as soda makers go out of business and bureaucratic red tape takes hold, it would be an inferior soda product. Does anyone still want that pop machine in the break room?

Love this! My patients were talking today about why we can’t hire scab House of Representatives? I mean that is what they would recommend to any employer whose employee was not working? Get rid if them and bring in people who would do the same work for half as much! Fair is fair right! A poly science major patient told me today that if the government acted this way in Engkend the law states THEY would not be paid, no work no pay! No work no pay!

Love this! My patients were talking today about why we can’t hire scab House of Representatives? I mean that is what they would recommend to any employer whose employee was not working? Get rid if them and bring in people who would do the same work for half as much! Fair is fair right! A poly science major patient told me today that if the government acted this way in Engkend the law states THEY would not be paid, no work no pay! No work no pay!

Love this! My patients were talking today about why we can’t hire scab House of Representatives? I mean that is what they would recommend to any employer whose employee was not working? Get rid if them and bring in people who would do the same work for half as much! Fair is fair right! A poly science major patient told me today that if the government acted this way in Engkend the law states THEY would not be paid, no work no pay! No work no pay!

The ACA is law. The way you change law is to win elections. Romney ran on a platform that included repealing and replacing the ACA, even though it was his idea in the first place.

The Tea Party thinks they can just change law in spite of the fact that they do not have the votes to do so and instead attempt to hold the country hostage to their minority opinion.

When the minority rules democracy dies.

Elections have consequences, the far right wing did not win the last election, they failed to gain a majority in the senate and have a slim majority in the House. When you are the minority you do not get to dictate the agenda.

That’s how our system works and the Tea Party needs to at some point understand how it works and learn the rules. It’s an embarrassment to our country that these ill informed dictators continue to disrupt our economy and way of life.

These people are not patriots. They have only one interest, and that is their own agenda.

The ACA is law. The way you change law is to win elections. Romney ran on a platform that included repealing and replacing the ACA, even though it was his idea in the first place.

The Tea Party thinks they can just change law in spite of the fact that they do not have the votes to do so and instead attempt to hold the country hostage to their minority opinion.

When the minority rules democracy dies.

Elections have consequences, the far right wing did not win the last election, they failed to gain a majority in the senate and have a slim majority in the House. When you are the minority you do not get to dictate the agenda.

That’s how our system works and the Tea Party needs to at some point understand how it works and learn the rules. It’s an embarrassment to our country that these ill informed dictators continue to disrupt our economy and way of life.

These people are not patriots. They have only one interest, and that is their own agenda.

The ACA is law. The way you change law is to win elections. Romney ran on a platform that included repealing and replacing the ACA, even though it was his idea in the first place.

The Tea Party thinks they can just change law in spite of the fact that they do not have the votes to do so and instead attempt to hold the country hostage to their minority opinion.

When the minority rules democracy dies.

Elections have consequences, the far right wing did not win the last election, they failed to gain a majority in the senate and have a slim majority in the House. When you are the minority you do not get to dictate the agenda.

That’s how our system works and the Tea Party needs to at some point understand how it works and learn the rules. It’s an embarrassment to our country that these ill informed dictators continue to disrupt our economy and way of life.

These people are not patriots. They have only one interest, and that is their own agenda.

Also we are forced to buy things from the Government everyday. IE auto insurance and if we dont we shouldn’t drive. I have never been in an accident but i pay for it anyway. Guess what if i dont have it and i came caught i pay a fine. And i know someone will say its not the same. Of course its not. Auto mandatory auto coverage is state law…..but what state doesn’t require it. So look at the big picture its here and its staying. And its has already helping working families that want health coverage.

Also we are forced to buy things from the Government everyday. IE auto insurance and if we dont we shouldn’t drive. I have never been in an accident but i pay for it anyway. Guess what if i dont have it and i came caught i pay a fine. And i know someone will say its not the same. Of course its not. Auto mandatory auto coverage is state law…..but what state doesn’t require it. So look at the big picture its here and its staying. And its has already helping working families that want health coverage.

Also we are forced to buy things from the Government everyday. IE auto insurance and if we dont we shouldn’t drive. I have never been in an accident but i pay for it anyway. Guess what if i dont have it and i came caught i pay a fine. And i know someone will say its not the same. Of course its not. Auto mandatory auto coverage is state law…..but what state doesn’t require it. So look at the big picture its here and its staying. And its has already helping working families that want health coverage.

The Perfect Example of Today’s Bureaucracy World Wide! My confusion lies in the accompanying photo? I am quite sure this did not involve the President? I believe the problem here is that everyone is quick to point fingers at their Commanders, but take no allowance that todays’s Bureaucracy has convinced today’s elected officials that there power to make change is only based on the information provided to them by the Bureaucracy which is based on personal agendas! The elected officials, who of course are elected by the public, are told by the public employees that there opinion only counts if it is in line with their line of thinking! This is the problem with our society today! Placid! See What I Mean? I based this status on the picture and not on the article! The guy disregarded the majority and made threats to get his way and now his Ass Better Be Fired! Just Sayin!

The Perfect Example of Today’s Bureaucracy World Wide! My confusion lies in the accompanying photo? I am quite sure this did not involve the President? I believe the problem here is that everyone is quick to point fingers at their Commanders, but take no allowance that todays’s Bureaucracy has convinced today’s elected officials that there power to make change is only based on the information provided to them by the Bureaucracy which is based on personal agendas! The elected officials, who of course are elected by the public, are told by the public employees that there opinion only counts if it is in line with their line of thinking! This is the problem with our society today! Placid! See What I Mean? I based this status on the picture and not on the article! The guy disregarded the majority and made threats to get his way and now his Ass Better Be Fired! Just Sayin!

Um, If the people were asked to vote on putting in a pizza making machine and a health food machine, and then upper management decided to put in a soda machine, you BET Bill would protest. Jesus you fuckers go to great lengths to stretch the truth. Obamacare first went thru as the military affordable housing act…. let’s call a spade a spade….

Um, If the people were asked to vote on putting in a pizza making machine and a health food machine, and then upper management decided to put in a soda machine, you BET Bill would protest. Jesus you fuckers go to great lengths to stretch the truth. Obamacare first went thru as the military affordable housing act…. let’s call a spade a spade….

Um, If the people were asked to vote on putting in a pizza making machine and a health food machine, and then upper management decided to put in a soda machine, you BET Bill would protest. Jesus you fuckers go to great lengths to stretch the truth. Obamacare first went thru as the military affordable housing act…. let’s call a spade a spade….

This is funny. How would you rewrite this for the 1977 government shutdown, then the democratically controlled congress was fighting with the democratically controlled senate and the government was shutdown because they couldn’t agree on whether Medicaid payments should be allowed for abortion. Oh yeah, and to too it off, there was a democratic president in office at that time too.

This is funny. How would you rewrite this for the 1977 government shutdown, then the democratically controlled congress was fighting with the democratically controlled senate and the government was shutdown because they couldn’t agree on whether Medicaid payments should be allowed for abortion. Oh yeah, and to too it off, there was a democratic president in office at that time too.

This is funny. How would you rewrite this for the 1977 government shutdown, then the democratically controlled congress was fighting with the democratically controlled senate and the government was shutdown because they couldn’t agree on whether Medicaid payments should be allowed for abortion. Oh yeah, and to too it off, there was a democratic president in office at that time too.

Say you don’t necessarily care for soda, but would drink it every day if your company insisted. You love your job, and just want to pay rent and feed your family. Then when the folks trying to improve your company’s morale try to install the new soda machine, Bill and his friends from Payroll decide to withhold everyone’s pay until the soda machine is gone. After this you find out that Payroll is not withholding everyone’s pay, just the the pay of everyone who are not in the payroll department or the company’s morale team. What do you do?

Say you don’t necessarily care for soda, but would drink it every day if your company insisted. You love your job, and just want to pay rent and feed your family. Then when the folks trying to improve your company’s morale try to install the new soda machine, Bill and his friends from Payroll decide to withhold everyone’s pay until the soda machine is gone. After this you find out that Payroll is not withholding everyone’s pay, just the the pay of everyone who are not in the payroll department or the company’s morale team. What do you do?

Say you don’t necessarily care for soda, but would drink it every day if your company insisted. You love your job, and just want to pay rent and feed your family. Then when the folks trying to improve your company’s morale try to install the new soda machine, Bill and his friends from Payroll decide to withhold everyone’s pay until the soda machine is gone. After this you find out that Payroll is not withholding everyone’s pay, just the the pay of everyone who are not in the payroll department or the company’s morale team. What do you do?

But the people in the office don’t want the soda machine. The small group of self important department representatives decided that the soda machine is what the people wanted and really we’re not sure what kind of soda it would have or how much the soda would cost and were ok with the people getting what they got because that small group of department representatives got Starbucks and Perrier delivered daily. It wasn’t about the people getting soda, it was about saying that they got the people soda.

But the people in the office don’t want the soda machine. The small group of self important department representatives decided that the soda machine is what the people wanted and really we’re not sure what kind of soda it would have or how much the soda would cost and were ok with the people getting what they got because that small group of department representatives got Starbucks and Perrier delivered daily. It wasn’t about the people getting soda, it was about saying that they got the people soda.

But the people in the office don’t want the soda machine. The small group of self important department representatives decided that the soda machine is what the people wanted and really we’re not sure what kind of soda it would have or how much the soda would cost and were ok with the people getting what they got because that small group of department representatives got Starbucks and Perrier delivered daily. It wasn’t about the people getting soda, it was about saying that they got the people soda.

“The majority of employees do not want to pay for a soda machine out of their paychecks. The management decided they would put a soda machine in place anyway and mandate that people purchase a soda from the machine and drink it every month.”

“If you previously brought in your own soda’s you will no longer be allowed to do so.”

“If the employees don’t buy soda’s from the machine they will be fined 1% of their salary this year and 2.5% of their salary next year.”

“Management will confiscate part of employee’s paychecks regardless of the situation and use that money to pay for 75% of the cost of management’s sodas.”

“The majority of employees do not want to pay for a soda machine out of their paychecks. The management decided they would put a soda machine in place anyway and mandate that people purchase a soda from the machine and drink it every month.”

“If you previously brought in your own soda’s you will no longer be allowed to do so.”

“If the employees don’t buy soda’s from the machine they will be fined 1% of their salary this year and 2.5% of their salary next year.”

“Management will confiscate part of employee’s paychecks regardless of the situation and use that money to pay for 75% of the cost of management’s sodas.”

“The majority of employees do not want to pay for a soda machine out of their paychecks. The management decided they would put a soda machine in place anyway and mandate that people purchase a soda from the machine and drink it every month.”

“If you previously brought in your own soda’s you will no longer be allowed to do so.”

“If the employees don’t buy soda’s from the machine they will be fined 1% of their salary this year and 2.5% of their salary next year.”

“Management will confiscate part of employee’s paychecks regardless of the situation and use that money to pay for 75% of the cost of management’s sodas.”

What if the company took a poll when half the employees were on vacation & the rest weren’t told what they were voting for? What if upper level employees are told they don’t have to pay for their Sodas , but everyone else has to pay more then what it costs at the local Convenience Store AND , they are not allowed to bring in their own Sodas?

What if the company took a poll when half the employees were on vacation & the rest weren’t told what they were voting for? What if upper level employees are told they don’t have to pay for their Sodas , but everyone else has to pay more then what it costs at the local Convenience Store AND , they are not allowed to bring in their own Sodas?

And then Bill says “Fine! I do the companies orders, and I refuse to stock the machine with soda”. He goes on to spread rediculous unfounded information that soda in the machine will ultimately cost you far more than driving to the deli down the road to get it. He starts ranting that the machine, which would actually save people money, and be more convenient, allowing workers to get soda who couldn’t afford to before, will somehow bankrupt the company. Obsessed, he froths at the mouth, even though it’s painfully clear he has zero chance of succeeding. It’s lost on him, that if anyone is costing the company money unnecessarily, it’s him.

And then Bill says “Fine! I do the companies orders, and I refuse to stock the machine with soda”. He goes on to spread rediculous unfounded information that soda in the machine will ultimately cost you far more than driving to the deli down the road to get it. He starts ranting that the machine, which would actually save people money, and be more convenient, allowing workers to get soda who couldn’t afford to before, will somehow bankrupt the company. Obsessed, he froths at the mouth, even though it’s painfully clear he has zero chance of succeeding. It’s lost on him, that if anyone is costing the company money unnecessarily, it’s him.

And then Bill says “Fine! I do the companies orders, and I refuse to stock the machine with soda”. He goes on to spread rediculous unfounded information that soda in the machine will ultimately cost you far more than driving to the deli down the road to get it. He starts ranting that the machine, which would actually save people money, and be more convenient, allowing workers to get soda who couldn’t afford to before, will somehow bankrupt the company. Obsessed, he froths at the mouth, even though it’s painfully clear he has zero chance of succeeding. It’s lost on him, that if anyone is costing the company money unnecessarily, it’s him.

The original sales pitch was ‘soda for everyone at a fair price.’ Unfortunately, this was very misleading because it implied the soda machine actually provided soda. It doesn’t. It creates a contract between you and the soda machine to provide a soda to you sometime in the future, after it decides on your behalf what type of soda you need. —- Health Insurance is NOT the same as Healthcare.

The original sales pitch was ‘soda for everyone at a fair price.’ Unfortunately, this was very misleading because it implied the soda machine actually provided soda. It doesn’t. It creates a contract between you and the soda machine to provide a soda to you sometime in the future, after it decides on your behalf what type of soda you need. —- Health Insurance is NOT the same as Healthcare.

The original sales pitch was ‘soda for everyone at a fair price.’ Unfortunately, this was very misleading because it implied the soda machine actually provided soda. It doesn’t. It creates a contract between you and the soda machine to provide a soda to you sometime in the future, after it decides on your behalf what type of soda you need. —- Health Insurance is NOT the same as Healthcare.

Problem… hospital procedures cost wayyyy more in US than in other country. Lower the cost, take power away from the current insurance company mafia so that a tylenol (which a pill costs twenty cents) doesn’t cost $40, and a bandage ($5) doesn’t cost $80. Might be a good step.

I don’t like the forcing of health insurance on people (but if they make it affordable then great). But friends of mine who make between $50,000 – $80,000 told me he was paying $60 every two weeks for work provided insurance. Since the ACA began, his company doubled that. So people who already have insurance may pay more for it. This should not happen.

Problem… hospital procedures cost wayyyy more in US than in other country. Lower the cost, take power away from the current insurance company mafia so that a tylenol (which a pill costs twenty cents) doesn’t cost $40, and a bandage ($5) doesn’t cost $80. Might be a good step.

I don’t like the forcing of health insurance on people (but if they make it affordable then great). But friends of mine who make between $50,000 – $80,000 told me he was paying $60 every two weeks for work provided insurance. Since the ACA began, his company doubled that. So people who already have insurance may pay more for it. This should not happen.

Problem… hospital procedures cost wayyyy more in US than in other country. Lower the cost, take power away from the current insurance company mafia so that a tylenol (which a pill costs twenty cents) doesn’t cost $40, and a bandage ($5) doesn’t cost $80. Might be a good step.

I don’t like the forcing of health insurance on people (but if they make it affordable then great). But friends of mine who make between $50,000 – $80,000 told me he was paying $60 every two weeks for work provided insurance. Since the ACA began, his company doubled that. So people who already have insurance may pay more for it. This should not happen.

Maybe Bill was one if the few guys in the office that realized that it wasn’t right that the company then mandated that every employee buy two sodas a day or get docked pay.

Maybe Bill also figured out that there’s only three kinds if soda in the machine and no one really has a good choice of sodas.

Maybe Bill further noticed that the sodas that should be $0.75 were actually $1.25. But it’s ok because the minimum wage workers get a weekly stipend in their salaries to offset the higher costs of the sodas. Meanwhile everyone else who makes more is locked into paying the full $1.25.

Lastly, perhaps Bill also learned that the company only pays the vendors a portion if their costs for the sodas and deliveries.

Maybe Bill was one if the few guys in the office that realized that it wasn’t right that the company then mandated that every employee buy two sodas a day or get docked pay.

Maybe Bill also figured out that there’s only three kinds if soda in the machine and no one really has a good choice of sodas.

Maybe Bill further noticed that the sodas that should be $0.75 were actually $1.25. But it’s ok because the minimum wage workers get a weekly stipend in their salaries to offset the higher costs of the sodas. Meanwhile everyone else who makes more is locked into paying the full $1.25.

Lastly, perhaps Bill also learned that the company only pays the vendors a portion if their costs for the sodas and deliveries.

Bill is not an ass. Bill is a healthy individual. Probably goes to the gym and eats healthy. Prevents himself from getting obese like the rest of this country which puts you at risk so much more for diseases. To be frank, healthy people are going to be paying for the stupid health choices of obese people. My health insurance plan is the gym and a healthy diet. It is ridiculous that I have to pay for a penalty fee for others not being in the gym. IMO Survival of the fittest and let obese people die off for their poor decisions and don’t let them ruin the lives of others. Of course there are circumstances where health care is necessary. But this country is too fat for the way ACA works now. If you sign up at HealthCare.gov, You better be in the gym and eating healthy every single day.

Maybe Bill was one if the few guys in the office that realized that it wasn’t right that the company then mandated that every employee buy two sodas a day or get docked pay.

Maybe Bill also figured out that there’s only three kinds if soda in the machine and no one really has a good choice of sodas.

Maybe Bill further noticed that the sodas that should be $0.75 were actually $1.25. But it’s ok because the minimum wage workers get a weekly stipend in their salaries to offset the higher costs of the sodas. Meanwhile everyone else who makes more is locked into paying the full $1.25.

Lastly, perhaps Bill also learned that the company only pays the vendors a portion if their costs for the sodas and deliveries.

Bill is not an ass. Bill is a healthy individual. Probably goes to the gym and eats healthy. Prevents himself from getting obese like the rest of this country which puts you at risk so much more for diseases. To be frank, healthy people are going to be paying for the stupid health choices of obese people. My health insurance plan is the gym and a healthy diet. It is ridiculous that I have to pay for a penalty fee for others not being in the gym. IMO Survival of the fittest and let obese people die off for their poor decisions and don’t let them ruin the lives of others. Of course there are circumstances where health care is necessary. But this country is too fat for the way ACA works now. If you sign up at HealthCare.gov, You better be in the gym and eating healthy every single day.

You, as an employee, will not be forced to pay for the products, the supplies, and the installation or maintenance of the pop machine. As a taxpayer, you will be paying for all of that with Ocare many, many, many times and you might not even have a policy. You will still be paying. Now imagine the pop machine people telling the workers “pay for it or you’ll be fired”. You would say “f that”, but with Ocare your saying “thank you Mr. President for making me buy and pay for things I won’t even use. You’re a wonderful dictator.” G’bye shitty analogy. Wave it g’bye as it sinks in a morass of illogic and blundherheaded thinking. Buh-bye.

You, as an employee, will not be forced to pay for the products, the supplies, and the installation or maintenance of the pop machine. As a taxpayer, you will be paying for all of that with Ocare many, many, many times and you might not even have a policy. You will still be paying. Now imagine the pop machine people telling the workers “pay for it or you’ll be fired”. You would say “f that”, but with Ocare your saying “thank you Mr. President for making me buy and pay for things I won’t even use. You’re a wonderful dictator.” G’bye shitty analogy. Wave it g’bye as it sinks in a morass of illogic and blundherheaded thinking. Buh-bye.

You, as an employee, will not be forced to pay for the products, the supplies, and the installation or maintenance of the pop machine. As a taxpayer, you will be paying for all of that with Ocare many, many, many times and you might not even have a policy. You will still be paying. Now imagine the pop machine people telling the workers “pay for it or you’ll be fired”. You would say “f that”, but with Ocare your saying “thank you Mr. President for making me buy and pay for things I won’t even use. You’re a wonderful dictator.” G’bye shitty analogy. Wave it g’bye as it sinks in a morass of illogic and blundherheaded thinking. Buh-bye.

Right..38.2% approval rating and losing “D” seats in congress as a result of the ACA certainly constitutes majority opinion. The Repubs are doing what they were elected to do. Yes, it’s law. But not all laws are meant to stand. Considering the sticker shock that former supporters are currently undergoing, I’m sure the approval rating will drop further and that there will be more calls to atleast FIX the damn law, by any means necessary.

Right..38.2% approval rating and losing “D” seats in congress as a result of the ACA certainly constitutes majority opinion. The Repubs are doing what they were elected to do. Yes, it’s law. But not all laws are meant to stand. Considering the sticker shock that former supporters are currently undergoing, I’m sure the approval rating will drop further and that there will be more calls to atleast FIX the damn law, by any means necessary.

So, the Majority has decided that not only does Bill have to pay a portion of his paycheck to buy/maintain the soda machine, but he will also be responsible for part of the dental bills that went along with drinking the soda. If Bill refuses to pay this, they will send company security to Bill’s home to threaten him into paying “his share”. Still think this is a good idea?

So, the Majority has decided that not only does Bill have to pay a portion of his paycheck to buy/maintain the soda machine, but he will also be responsible for part of the dental bills that went along with drinking the soda. If Bill refuses to pay this, they will send company security to Bill’s home to threaten him into paying “his share”. Still think this is a good idea?

I’m Canadian, and don’t know much about the exact way that this whole AFC is going down, but doesn’t it count for something that the countries that usually rate highest on the quality of life polls, or GDP, all have some version of centralized health care except for the States (who get on the list for many other reasons)? Maybe this one bill/law/act isn’t perfect, but isn’t worth taking a step in that direction?

I’m Canadian, and don’t know much about the exact way that this whole AFC is going down, but doesn’t it count for something that the countries that usually rate highest on the quality of life polls, or GDP, all have some version of centralized health care except for the States (who get on the list for many other reasons)? Maybe this one bill/law/act isn’t perfect, but isn’t worth taking a step in that direction?

So, the Majority has decided that not only does Bill have to pay a portion of his paycheck to buy/maintain the soda machine, but he will also be responsible for part of the dental bills that went along with drinking the soda. If Bill refuses to pay this, they will send company security to Bill’s home to threaten him into paying “his share”. Still think this is a good idea?

The people who voted against the soda machine did so, not because they didn’t want sodas for everyone, but because they would have to pay for all of the sodas, not just the ones they drank – if they even drank any – but all of them. The people who voted for the soda machine did so because they new they would get free soda. And the group of people who were elected to better morale go along with it because it makes them popular with all of the people drinking free sodas.

The people who voted against the soda machine did so, not because they didn’t want sodas for everyone, but because they would have to pay for all of the sodas, not just the ones they drank – if they even drank any – but all of them. The people who voted for the soda machine did so because they new they would get free soda. And the group of people who were elected to better morale go along with it because it makes them popular with all of the people drinking free sodas.

The people who voted against the soda machine did so, not because they didn’t want sodas for everyone, but because they would have to pay for all of the sodas, not just the ones they drank – if they even drank any – but all of them. The people who voted for the soda machine did so because they new they would get free soda. And the group of people who were elected to better morale go along with it because it makes them popular with all of the people drinking free sodas.

Ok, can someone please explain to me why the company’s CEO, it’s board members, and the long list of unions and other giant corporations are exempt from having to buy any soda? If the soda machine is such a great idea then why doesn’t anyone on the list want to buy any soda from it? Something stinks…..

Ok, can someone please explain to me why the company’s CEO, it’s board members, and the long list of unions and other giant corporations are exempt from having to buy any soda? If the soda machine is such a great idea then why doesn’t anyone on the list want to buy any soda from it? Something stinks…..

Ok, can someone please explain to me why the company’s CEO, it’s board members, and the long list of unions and other giant corporations are exempt from having to buy any soda? If the soda machine is such a great idea then why doesn’t anyone on the list want to buy any soda from it? Something stinks…..

@ Christopher Brouelette: Any attempt to attribute fiscal or social responsibility to Cruz’ pressuring Boehner into preventing a House vote on the budget pretty much falls flat on its face. Is he right? Is he wrong? Either/or/both, but not for the reasons given. Cruz and the Tea Party House Repubs are as willing to run up a massive deficit as any of them as long as the right cronies get the benes; in this case, the ones who got “shorted” when the Senate line-itemed out some pork after massive citizen pressuse was brought to bear.

@ Christopher Brouelette: Any attempt to attribute fiscal or social responsibility to Cruz’ pressuring Boehner into preventing a House vote on the budget pretty much falls flat on its face. Is he right? Is he wrong? Either/or/both, but not for the reasons given. Cruz and the Tea Party House Repubs are as willing to run up a massive deficit as any of them as long as the right cronies get the benes; in this case, the ones who got “shorted” when the Senate line-itemed out some pork after massive citizen pressuse was brought to bear.

@ Christopher Brouelette: Any attempt to attribute fiscal or social responsibility to Cruz’ pressuring Boehner into preventing a House vote on the budget pretty much falls flat on its face. Is he right? Is he wrong? Either/or/both, but not for the reasons given. Cruz and the Tea Party House Repubs are as willing to run up a massive deficit as any of them as long as the right cronies get the benes; in this case, the ones who got “shorted” when the Senate line-itemed out some pork after massive citizen pressuse was brought to bear.

Look at it like this either way we pay. If someone is sick and goes to the ER without health insurance they will be seen. Even though they can’t pay…so who pays? We do with higher premiums. I’m not for or against ACA, but I have health care and some lower income families don’t have the same. We live in the greatest country in the world and we need to act like it.

But it isn’t a soda machine…its water. Everyone needs it at some point in their life. If you don’t bring it, and you refuse to buy it, when you get dehydrated, we all have to supply you with it. Over and over. which makes our costs for water higher than it would be if you just paid for your own. Bill, as an accounting genius, should be able to figure that out. When he gets dehydrated from forgetting or deciding he can’t afford to bring his own water that day, who has to pay for him?

But it isn’t a soda machine…its water. Everyone needs it at some point in their life. If you don’t bring it, and you refuse to buy it, when you get dehydrated, we all have to supply you with it. Over and over. which makes our costs for water higher than it would be if you just paid for your own. Bill, as an accounting genius, should be able to figure that out. When he gets dehydrated from forgetting or deciding he can’t afford to bring his own water that day, who has to pay for him?

But it isn’t a soda machine…its water. Everyone needs it at some point in their life. If you don’t bring it, and you refuse to buy it, when you get dehydrated, we all have to supply you with it. Over and over. which makes our costs for water higher than it would be if you just paid for your own. Bill, as an accounting genius, should be able to figure that out. When he gets dehydrated from forgetting or deciding he can’t afford to bring his own water that day, who has to pay for him?

As a Canadian who has several friends WHO WOULD HAVE DIED WITHOUT MEDICARE I can promise you that Bill is pulling the wool over everyone’s eyes and making everyone suffer. Next time a drunk driver hits you with their car and you don’t have healthcare since you were born into a shitty neighborhood you’ll think again about how altruistic Bill really is.

As a Canadian who has several friends WHO WOULD HAVE DIED WITHOUT MEDICARE I can promise you that Bill is pulling the wool over everyone’s eyes and making everyone suffer. Next time a drunk driver hits you with their car and you don’t have healthcare since you were born into a shitty neighborhood you’ll think again about how altruistic Bill really is.

As a Canadian who has several friends WHO WOULD HAVE DIED WITHOUT MEDICARE I can promise you that Bill is pulling the wool over everyone’s eyes and making everyone suffer. Next time a drunk driver hits you with their car and you don’t have healthcare since you were born into a shitty neighborhood you’ll think again about how altruistic Bill really is.

I love the people who are like “ACA is the law the should stop trying to change it”. Where are all of you when he is trying to change the first, second, fourth and tenth amendments? NO WHERE!!! Not a peep well that is unless you were hoping he would change those laws. Jack wads!!

So… When the employees find out that the soda costs $10 per can (instead of the 50 cents that the CEO promised), and every time someone tries to purchase a soda, the power goes out, and no one knows how to fix the machine because the instruction manual is 2700 pages long… maybe the jackass who decided to buy the machine in the middle of the night should be fired. BTW, Bill in accounting didn’t want to stop the company from buying the machine, he just wanted to stop the company from forcing every employee to buy a can of soda every day (while exempting the CEO and all his buddies). Oh, and every can of soda tastes like feet…

I love the people who are like “ACA is the law the should stop trying to change it”. Where are all of you when he is trying to change the first, second, fourth and tenth amendments? NO WHERE!!! Not a peep well that is unless you were hoping he would change those laws. Jack wads!!

I love the people who are like “ACA is the law the should stop trying to change it”. Where are all of you when he is trying to change the first, second, fourth and tenth amendments? NO WHERE!!! Not a peep well that is unless you were hoping he would change those laws. Jack wads!!

I thought the company installed a refrigerator that is stocked with 6oz cans, 12oz cans, 20oz bottles, and 2liter bottles and that the environment will be less poluted 10years from now because of the waste management team’s efforts in forecasting the quantities consumed.

I thought the company installed a refrigerator that is stocked with 6oz cans, 12oz cans, 20oz bottles, and 2liter bottles and that the environment will be less poluted 10years from now because of the waste management team’s efforts in forecasting the quantities consumed.

I thought the company installed a refrigerator that is stocked with 6oz cans, 12oz cans, 20oz bottles, and 2liter bottles and that the environment will be less poluted 10years from now because of the waste management team’s efforts in forecasting the quantities consumed.

It’s called socialized medicare. It’s pretty common. Look it up. Canada has it, most of Europe has it. In fact, most modernized countries have it and they pay less for health care than Americans do and they have better health outcomes.

It’s called socialized medicare. It’s pretty common. Look it up. Canada has it, most of Europe has it. In fact, most modernized countries have it and they pay less for health care than Americans do and they have better health outcomes.

Bill doesn’t want the new soda machine, even though the office actually already had a soda machine, and it wasn’t really working properly. Sometimes it would take your money and then decide it didn’t want to give you a soda, because fuck you, I already have your money. The soda was also so expensive that poor people couldn’t afford it. Also, the alternative to not having access to the soda was going bankrupt and losing your house, or just plain dying. Bill was paid by the companies that made the first soda machine they had, to oppose the new soda machine.

Bill doesn’t want the new soda machine, even though the office actually already had a soda machine, and it wasn’t really working properly. Sometimes it would take your money and then decide it didn’t want to give you a soda, because fuck you, I already have your money. The soda was also so expensive that poor people couldn’t afford it. Also, the alternative to not having access to the soda was going bankrupt and losing your house, or just plain dying. Bill was paid by the companies that made the first soda machine they had, to oppose the new soda machine.

Bill doesn’t want the new soda machine, even though the office actually already had a soda machine, and it wasn’t really working properly. Sometimes it would take your money and then decide it didn’t want to give you a soda, because fuck you, I already have your money. The soda was also so expensive that poor people couldn’t afford it. Also, the alternative to not having access to the soda was going bankrupt and losing your house, or just plain dying. Bill was paid by the companies that made the first soda machine they had, to oppose the new soda machine.

too bad Bill didn’t get a chance to explain that all of his co-workers would take a pay cut to pay for that coke machine, and then they still had to buy their own sodas, but anyone else in the building but not in their office could have it for free. You couldn’t chose, even NON soda drinkers at Bills company have to pay, in addition to having their hours cut so they lose their benefits. Also it only carries COKE, if you drink pepsi products TUFF you are still going to pay for the machine, and the coke, and you have to buy the coke every day.

too bad Bill didn’t get a chance to explain that all of his co-workers would take a pay cut to pay for that coke machine, and then they still had to buy their own sodas, but anyone else in the building but not in their office could have it for free. You couldn’t chose, even NON soda drinkers at Bills company have to pay, in addition to having their hours cut so they lose their benefits. Also it only carries COKE, if you drink pepsi products TUFF you are still going to pay for the machine, and the coke, and you have to buy the coke every day.

too bad Bill didn’t get a chance to explain that all of his co-workers would take a pay cut to pay for that coke machine, and then they still had to buy their own sodas, but anyone else in the building but not in their office could have it for free. You couldn’t chose, even NON soda drinkers at Bills company have to pay, in addition to having their hours cut so they lose their benefits. Also it only carries COKE, if you drink pepsi products TUFF you are still going to pay for the machine, and the coke, and you have to buy the coke every day.

Problem this article leaves out is that “NO ONE IS FORCING BILL TO DRINK OR BUY THE SODA!” The article works in a tiny little out of context scenario. And it’s funny.
How about this: “Every company in the United States installs a soda machine and it is mandatory that every employee must drink the soda or they will be fined”. No alternative, No choice. Bill is fucked either way.

Problem this article leaves out is that “NO ONE IS FORCING BILL TO DRINK OR BUY THE SODA!” The article works in a tiny little out of context scenario. And it’s funny.
How about this: “Every company in the United States installs a soda machine and it is mandatory that every employee must drink the soda or they will be fined”. No alternative, No choice. Bill is fucked either way.

Thaddeus Gunn did something darng folks, he cited facts…..I tire of reading the same shit over and over that I read from someone playing politics…i.e. Fox News, Limbaugh, CNN……most of what people believe w/o looking they can check on their own before making fools of themselves……the ACA is law, by the way…..my best friend, a physician, has already reported a decline in medical costs, one of the chief reasons for the ACA…

Problem this article leaves out is that “NO ONE IS FORCING BILL TO DRINK OR BUY THE SODA!” The article works in a tiny little out of context scenario. And it’s funny.
How about this: “Every company in the United States installs a soda machine and it is mandatory that every employee must drink the soda or they will be fined”. No alternative, No choice. Bill is fucked either way.

Thaddeus Gunn did something darng folks, he cited facts…..I tire of reading the same shit over and over that I read from someone playing politics…i.e. Fox News, Limbaugh, CNN……most of what people believe w/o looking they can check on their own before making fools of themselves……the ACA is law, by the way…..my best friend, a physician, has already reported a decline in medical costs, one of the chief reasons for the ACA…

Another version…no one actually knows what kind of machine it will be because no one has read the owner’s manual. Further, many of the people who voted for the machine aren’t going to have to pay for it, and the people who will be paying for it don’t want it. Further, the office already is bankrupt!

Another version…no one actually knows what kind of machine it will be because no one has read the owner’s manual. Further, many of the people who voted for the machine aren’t going to have to pay for it, and the people who will be paying for it don’t want it. Further, the office already is bankrupt!

Another version…no one actually knows what kind of machine it will be because no one has read the owner’s manual. Further, many of the people who voted for the machine aren’t going to have to pay for it, and the people who will be paying for it don’t want it. Further, the office already is bankrupt!

This is nice story but bears almost no relation. Very different actually. Are all the employees forced to buy the soda if they don’t bring their own soda to work? Are the super rich (who put the office in the position to not be able to afford the soda to begin with) benefitting huge financial profits off the forced sale of soda to the largest, most financially trouble group in the office? Is the soda unaffordable to most people who aren’t already buying the soda to begin with? Are the people who have something better and more affordable than soda in their section of the office being forced to pay fines for not jumping on the soda band wagon?

This is nice story but bears almost no relation. Very different actually. Are all the employees forced to buy the soda if they don’t bring their own soda to work? Are the super rich (who put the office in the position to not be able to afford the soda to begin with) benefitting huge financial profits off the forced sale of soda to the largest, most financially trouble group in the office? Is the soda unaffordable to most people who aren’t already buying the soda to begin with? Are the people who have something better and more affordable than soda in their section of the office being forced to pay fines for not jumping on the soda band wagon?

This is nice story but bears almost no relation. Very different actually. Are all the employees forced to buy the soda if they don’t bring their own soda to work? Are the super rich (who put the office in the position to not be able to afford the soda to begin with) benefitting huge financial profits off the forced sale of soda to the largest, most financially trouble group in the office? Is the soda unaffordable to most people who aren’t already buying the soda to begin with? Are the people who have something better and more affordable than soda in their section of the office being forced to pay fines for not jumping on the soda band wagon?

Sadly, most of the people who voted “Yes” for the soda machine didn’t realize that they would have to pay for their own soda…and if they didn’t buy soda from the soda machine that they would have to pay a yearly penalty.

Sadly, most of the people who voted “Yes” for the soda machine didn’t realize that they would have to pay for their own soda…and if they didn’t buy soda from the soda machine that they would have to pay a yearly penalty.

Sadly, most of the people who voted “Yes” for the soda machine didn’t realize that they would have to pay for their own soda…and if they didn’t buy soda from the soda machine that they would have to pay a yearly penalty.

Interesting attempt at an analogy of what’s going on. This is what’s more realistic.

But that’s not at all what’s going on. The analogy would be company polls about a soda machine. Not a majority wanted it, but a few in management said they were getting one anyway. And on top of that, everyone would be forced to buy sodas they never asked for.

Interesting attempt at an analogy of what’s going on. This is what’s more realistic.

But that’s not at all what’s going on. The analogy would be company polls about a soda machine. Not a majority wanted it, but a few in management said they were getting one anyway. And on top of that, everyone would be forced to buy sodas they never asked for.

Well if Bill did it because he didn’t like soda, I’d agree. But if the company is $17 trillion in debt and the soda machine cost another trillion, was the only soda machine in the country and immediately switched the soda and inflated the price, I might agree with Bill and think the employees were the jackasses.

Well if Bill did it because he didn’t like soda, I’d agree. But if the company is $17 trillion in debt and the soda machine cost another trillion, was the only soda machine in the country and immediately switched the soda and inflated the price, I might agree with Bill and think the employees were the jackasses.

Interesting attempt at an analogy of what’s going on. This is what’s more realistic.

But that’s not at all what’s going on. The analogy would be company polls about a soda machine. Not a majority wanted it, but a few in management said they were getting one anyway. And on top of that, everyone would be forced to buy sodas they never asked for.

The majority of people in this country are uneducated in terms of what “free” actually means. I am all for helping people that need it. Fortunately the entire society does not need this crap that is being peddled

The majority of people in this country are uneducated in terms of what “free” actually means. I am all for helping people that need it. Fortunately the entire society does not need this crap that is being peddled

The majority of people in this country are uneducated in terms of what “free” actually means. I am all for helping people that need it. Fortunately the entire society does not need this crap that is being peddled

Obamacare sucks, but hell, no one will point it out. Just a bunch of partisan pandering. I’m convinced Obama could stab some of you, shit into the wound, and you’d argue that it’s sanitary.

Costs will go up. We’ve seen that many people can’t keep their existing plans and insurance because of Obamacare restrictions. We’ve seen him edit the bill almost 20 times.. But what does it matter? Its Obama! Its our guy!

Obamacare sucks, but hell, no one will point it out. Just a bunch of partisan pandering. I’m convinced Obama could stab some of you, shit into the wound, and you’d argue that it’s sanitary.

Costs will go up. We’ve seen that many people can’t keep their existing plans and insurance because of Obamacare restrictions. We’ve seen him edit the bill almost 20 times.. But what does it matter? Its Obama! Its our guy!

Obamacare sucks, but hell, no one will point it out. Just a bunch of partisan pandering. I’m convinced Obama could stab some of you, shit into the wound, and you’d argue that it’s sanitary.

Costs will go up. We’ve seen that many people can’t keep their existing plans and insurance because of Obamacare restrictions. We’ve seen him edit the bill almost 20 times.. But what does it matter? Its Obama! Its our guy!

OH WOW THIS IS SO FUNNY AND TRUE…I HATE WHEN POLITICIANS STOMP THEIR FEET AND COMPLAIN ABOUT SHIT AND KEEP THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS FROM TAKING PLACE AND DONT DO THEIR JOB…EXCEPT WHEN, YOU KNOW, BILL FROM PAYROLL IS A WOMAN, AND WORKS IN TEXAS, AND WEARS SNEAKERS TO BETTER ACCOMMODATE HER FOOT-STOMPING…CAUSE THAT WOULD BE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT

OH WOW THIS IS SO FUNNY AND TRUE…I HATE WHEN POLITICIANS STOMP THEIR FEET AND COMPLAIN ABOUT SHIT AND KEEP THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS FROM TAKING PLACE AND DONT DO THEIR JOB…EXCEPT WHEN, YOU KNOW, BILL FROM PAYROLL IS A WOMAN, AND WORKS IN TEXAS, AND WEARS SNEAKERS TO BETTER ACCOMMODATE HER FOOT-STOMPING…CAUSE THAT WOULD BE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT

OH WOW THIS IS SO FUNNY AND TRUE…I HATE WHEN POLITICIANS STOMP THEIR FEET AND COMPLAIN ABOUT SHIT AND KEEP THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS FROM TAKING PLACE AND DONT DO THEIR JOB…EXCEPT WHEN, YOU KNOW, BILL FROM PAYROLL IS A WOMAN, AND WORKS IN TEXAS, AND WEARS SNEAKERS TO BETTER ACCOMMODATE HER FOOT-STOMPING…CAUSE THAT WOULD BE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT

If we drank water and not soda then none of this would even be an issue. The reason we need all of this healthcare is the soda and other illegitimate nutrient sources us Americans choose to divulge ourselves on. If you eat correctly, you do not need healthcare because you have already cared for your health.

If we drank water and not soda then none of this would even be an issue. The reason we need all of this healthcare is the soda and other illegitimate nutrient sources us Americans choose to divulge ourselves on. If you eat correctly, you do not need healthcare because you have already cared for your health.

If we drank water and not soda then none of this would even be an issue. The reason we need all of this healthcare is the soda and other illegitimate nutrient sources us Americans choose to divulge ourselves on. If you eat correctly, you do not need healthcare because you have already cared for your health.

Except for one crucial element.
With a soda machine, everyone has the option to just walk on by it.
It would be closer to a correct allegory if Bill, all the employees, there, and everyone in the surrounding buildings were going to be forced into the breakroom to purchase sodas whether they want them or not.
And if they don’t want to purchase sodas… that’s fine… the first day, they can just pay a $0.50 waiver fee to not buy a soda.
The second day, they could pay a $2.75 waiver fee to not buy a soda.
The third day, they could pay a $10.50 waiver fee to not buy a soda.
And so on.

Except for one crucial element.
With a soda machine, everyone has the option to just walk on by it.
It would be closer to a correct allegory if Bill, all the employees, there, and everyone in the surrounding buildings were going to be forced into the breakroom to purchase sodas whether they want them or not.
And if they don’t want to purchase sodas… that’s fine… the first day, they can just pay a $0.50 waiver fee to not buy a soda.
The second day, they could pay a $2.75 waiver fee to not buy a soda.
The third day, they could pay a $10.50 waiver fee to not buy a soda.
And so on.

Let’s not forget that the sodas are so bad for you that the company leadership exempted themselves, and their close friends for a full year. Bill also has the responsibility and authority to dictate what the company spends money on every year. He’s not a payroll clerk, he’s the CFO.

Let’s not forget that the sodas are so bad for you that the company leadership exempted themselves, and their close friends for a full year. Bill also has the responsibility and authority to dictate what the company spends money on every year. He’s not a payroll clerk, he’s the CFO.

Let’s not forget that the sodas are so bad for you that the company leadership exempted themselves, and their close friends for a full year. Bill also has the responsibility and authority to dictate what the company spends money on every year. He’s not a payroll clerk, he’s the CFO.

Our Congress simply does not work for us as the people it serves. Maybe when it was originally formed there were very definitely good intentions, but the “road to Hell was paved with good intentions” and here we are allowing our government…that we allegedly are a part of and supposedly have a say in…use Totalitarian tactics in order to win an argument. We need to go back to the basics.

Our Congress simply does not work for us as the people it serves. Maybe when it was originally formed there were very definitely good intentions, but the “road to Hell was paved with good intentions” and here we are allowing our government…that we allegedly are a part of and supposedly have a say in…use Totalitarian tactics in order to win an argument. We need to go back to the basics.

Our Congress simply does not work for us as the people it serves. Maybe when it was originally formed there were very definitely good intentions, but the “road to Hell was paved with good intentions” and here we are allowing our government…that we allegedly are a part of and supposedly have a say in…use Totalitarian tactics in order to win an argument. We need to go back to the basics.

Of course in the current allegory it’s irrelevant because the stupid soda machine doesn’t even work so it’s not like anyone’s getting any sodas anyways.

Seriously folks…it was his so-called “signature achievement” and he didn’t even make sure the crap worked before he brought it on-line. Obamacare is the perfect metaphor for his entire Presidency. It’s all about smoke and mirrors and in the end it just doesn’t work.

Of course in the current allegory it’s irrelevant because the stupid soda machine doesn’t even work so it’s not like anyone’s getting any sodas anyways.

Seriously folks…it was his so-called “signature achievement” and he didn’t even make sure the crap worked before he brought it on-line. Obamacare is the perfect metaphor for his entire Presidency. It’s all about smoke and mirrors and in the end it just doesn’t work.

Of course in the current allegory it’s irrelevant because the stupid soda machine doesn’t even work so it’s not like anyone’s getting any sodas anyways.

Seriously folks…it was his so-called “signature achievement” and he didn’t even make sure the crap worked before he brought it on-line. Obamacare is the perfect metaphor for his entire Presidency. It’s all about smoke and mirrors and in the end it just doesn’t work.

I want to exercise, eat healthy and take herbs and vitamins- not drink soda, so please lets not force me to drink from the machine. Put the machine out there but do not fine us who do not wish to partake. Freedom of health is going to need to be the new amendment.

I want to exercise, eat healthy and take herbs and vitamins- not drink soda, so please lets not force me to drink from the machine. Put the machine out there but do not fine us who do not wish to partake. Freedom of health is going to need to be the new amendment.

I want to exercise, eat healthy and take herbs and vitamins- not drink soda, so please lets not force me to drink from the machine. Put the machine out there but do not fine us who do not wish to partake. Freedom of health is going to need to be the new amendment.

You actually should have stopped earlier in the article. You stated that poll after poll was done and everyone wanted to keep the soda machine. Well, poll after poll have be done asking whether people want Obamacare and for the most part they don’t. So by you analogy we should be firing the President.

You actually should have stopped earlier in the article. You stated that poll after poll was done and everyone wanted to keep the soda machine. Well, poll after poll have be done asking whether people want Obamacare and for the most part they don’t. So by you analogy we should be firing the President.

How it should work:
As an act of appreciation for employee’s contributions to the progress of the company , we are donating a soda per day to every employee, free of charge. If you do not like soda you may chose any other beverage you wish, be it coffee, soup or water.

Bill, in accounting, has found a way to fund this by reducing the end of year bonuses the executives receive. Bill is a hero now!

How it should work:
As an act of appreciation for employee’s contributions to the progress of the company , we are donating a soda per day to every employee, free of charge. If you do not like soda you may chose any other beverage you wish, be it coffee, soup or water.

Bill, in accounting, has found a way to fund this by reducing the end of year bonuses the executives receive. Bill is a hero now!